Skip to comments.Why Noah's Flood was Local
Posted on 05/29/2006 6:28:25 AM PDT by truthfinder9
I often hear skeptics point to the belief in the global flood as a reason to not believe Christianity. I also see "Christian" creationist groups condem other Christians who believe the local flood is the literal interpretation. It's time we start telling "Christian" groups like ICR and AIG to stop turning people away from the Bible and tell them to stop their childish, immature attacks on other Christians (AIG recently refused to be subject to review, now there's the making of a cult!). And it's time for Christians to stop blindly believing everything they are told, just because it comes from other Christians.
Why the Local Flood is the Literal View
Crazy so called Christian liberal extremists who don't want to believe in the majority view of the worldwide flood are pushing the jihad against Christians as much as their Muslim friends are pushing the war against the west.
That's because if they can successfully get groups of believers to DISbelieve one of the foundational stories in the Bible, they can systematically destroy the rest of the Bible by instilling doubt and unbelief, thereby removing sin from the world, which removes the need for a savior.
But size isn't the real issue, isn't it? It's whether there were any survivors besides Noah and his family.
At some time around 2300 BC, give or take a century or two, a large number of the major civilisations of the world collapsed, simultaneously it seems. The Akkadian Empire in Mesopotamia, the Old Kingdom in Egypt, the Early Bronze Age civilisation in Israel, Anatolia and Greece, as well as the Indus Valley civilisation in India, the Hilmand civilisation in Afghanistan and the Hongshan Culture in China - the first urban civilisations in the world - all fell into ruin at more or less the same time. Why?
I think Brother Cloud survived. What is the elevation of Nepal?
In times past, what some thought to be "foundational" biblical truths, turned out to be misinterpretations of the Scriptures.
Hard to misinterpret this...
"For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;"
Taking the Bible as it is, it IS a story seen from a local point of View. Assuming that Moses is the author, this is the historty of the world as known to him, a descendent of Abraham of Ur.
I have always assumed that the Bible is stories handed down from generation to generation and translated from language to language. I don't take everything literally.
I don't see how that makes the lessons, morals and customs any less valid or God any less real.
Assuming Moses was the author, and he is the traditionally the author, he was writing from a particular time and place. He would know what God chose to tell him, and he would understand in accordance with his experience.
Then he is not precluded from writing of a universal flood if God had told him about it.
So what is your basis for the claim that, "taking the Bible as it is, it IS a story seen from a local point of View."
There is material evidence for a universal flood. In any case, I assume that God spoke to Moses in visions and that Moses understood the past as he understood the future, through a cloud.
marking to read later.
I sincerely doubt, in this day and age, that anything is being misinterpreted. And it is for this reason, alone, that there is a need by liberal "Christians" to cast doubt on the interpretations that have been long since proven.
Who needs faith in a Savior when there really is no such thing as sin?
Anything I highlighted above stick out atcha?
THE FLOOD WATERS ABATE: INTO THE PERSIAN GULF
Noah's Flood, recent in occurrence and confined to the Mesopotamian valley and its inhabitants, was retribution for sin, but as Paul states, "Sin is not imputed when there is no law" (Rom. 5:13b). Those civilizations outside the Adamic covenant and outside the immediate area were unaccountable and unaffected by the flood. If we take into consideration the allowable interpretations of "earth" instead of "land," "heaven" rather than "sky," and "mountains" as against "hills," coupled with the Hebrew words "all" and "every" when we would say "much" and "many," plus the Hebrew penchant for perfect or prophetic numbers, we should be able to understand how a Mesopotamian calamity has been misunderstood as a global cataclysm.
The biblical, archaeological, and anthropological evidence corroborates that God spared human populations who were outside the Mesopotamian valley and outside of His covenant. God "winked at" their ignorance (Acts 17:30), but targeted the Adamites in particular, obliterating those who were answerable and willfully disobedient. Evidently the Sumerians were hapless bystanders, many of whom perished, and some may have become proselytes who drowned in the flood.
In Luke, the Pharisees asked Jesus to rebuke His disciples, "And He answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out" (Luke 19:40). The "stones" in the form of inscribed clay tablets are crying out today, confirming God's Word. Are we listening, or are we like the Pharisees?
Anyone interested in reading this whole chapter can let me know and I'll freepmail it to you.
(Also see #12 in this thread)