captainbryce
Active Member
What do you think..."Global flood" or "Mesopotamian flood"?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Christians....could Noah's flood have been a local event?
- Thread starter captainbryce
- Start date
Freelance_Policeman
Member
I think it was probably global, since Greek, Egyptian, and Native American mythologies all record a huge flood that was survived by only one or few people.
james2ko
Well-Known Member
If it was not global, God could have simply told Noah to relocate instead of going through the gargantuan task of building an ark.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
the earth is covered with more water then land, so it is still flooded, so it was very likely a global flood.
Last edited:
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
I'd say it was more than likely a local event, pretty extensive maybe, but probably not global.
captainbryce
Active Member
I'm pretty sure God had plans for rebuilding humanity in the Mesopotamian region for a variety of other reasons, being the cradle of civilization and all. Plus, I think he wanted the people who weren't on the Ark to see Noah build an Ark and know what judgement was coming for them before they all died. Having Noah and family relocate would have defeated that purpose.
captainbryce
Active Member
What happened to you not being interested in responding to me anymore? Guess that went out the window pretty quick.
captainbryce
Active Member
The logic here is flawed in a number of different ways.
1) The earth has ALWAYS been covered with "more" water than land. That does not mean that it has always been "flooded". Clearly, when God separated the waters and made dry land appear, there were areas on the Earth that were not flooded.
2) The bible says that "the waters were dried up from off the earth" after the flood (Genesis 8:7). Yet the oceans remain and the planet is still covered mostly by water! By your logic, the oceans should all be dried up as well (because they flood the earth).
So under this argument, it doesn't seem to follow that this would necessitate Noah's flood being a global event.
I think she only had that one topic in mind. Chill out, bro.What happened to you not being interested in responding to me anymore? Guess that went out the window pretty quick.
Anyway, Noah's flood could have been a global thing (The world wasn't even flooded for half a year, so not a lot of evidence of it would even be left to start with), but I think a local event is far more likely with the evidence that we have.
"Earth" in the Bible="dirt/dry land," not "terrestrial planet orbiting the sun."
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
I don't know your position on the topic, and I know that mine is probably different than my Church's. Would you prefer that I not have answered? I can always delete my post if it will make you happy. (Please don't conclude that just because I posted on your thread that I like you or think that you're a nice person.)What happened to you not being interested in responding to me anymore? Guess that went out the window pretty quick.
Last edited:
james2ko
Well-Known Member
Pretty sure...I think??? Seems as though you are guessing or offering your own opinion which is nice and all. But based on the historically accurate document in front of me (bible), I don't just think or am pretty sure it was global---I'm certain it was. To convince me it was local, you would have to present hard biblical evidence. Got any?
theosis
Member
There is absolutely no geological evidence that such a global flood took place. In addition, there are several Mesopotamian myths that closely correlate to the Biblical flood story as well as evidence that such a flood did take place, giving further credence to the 'local flood' theory.
james2ko
Well-Known Member
There's plenty of it. Google it...
FranklinMichaelV.3
Well-Known Member
I would say it's allegorical.
When people first started settling down they settled down rivers (water for boiling and cooking and cleaning), when storms would occur, the areas would flood. That's why so many cultures have these flood stories.
When people first started settling down they settled down rivers (water for boiling and cooking and cleaning), when storms would occur, the areas would flood. That's why so many cultures have these flood stories.
Sultan Of Swing
Well-Known Member
Local flood, probably. That's what the evidence suggests anyway.
james2ko said:
God has a habit of testing people's faith and asking great things of them, even if they might not be deemed by us as necessary. The point is Noah's obedience and trust in God, rather than the flood itself.
james2ko
Well-Known Member
Although there is truth to your statement, I do not believe God would put Noah, his family, and the animal kingdom through such extreme measures for a local event.
Sultan Of Swing
Well-Known Member
*cough* Abraham being commanded to sacrifice his son *cough*
james2ko
Well-Known Member
Versus 120 years of stressful, back-breaking, laborious ship building all while facing ridicule from the local population. When a simple relocation, such as was asked of Abraham, would have sufficed? BTW...Apple cider vinegar and honey would do that cough some justice
adi2d
Active Member
Job always seemed pretty extreme to me. I guess there is a moral there somewhere.