Explaining Genesis - Noahs Ark part one

[DeeDee]

Many people find it hard to believe in Noah's ark for a few reasons. I want to address a few of them here. One reason is people want to know where all the water went if the whole world was aflood. Another reason is they find it hard to believe that every single animal species would have fit on that boat. I have a simple explanation that would clarify quite a lot. Since its quite often thought that life began in Africa or Asia (Asia I think is more fitting since Jerusalem and Israel are on that continent), that is most probably where life existed for thousands of years. Were'nt the other continents only discovered after Christ's time? Okay I understand that each continent has its native people but that is for another discussion. Lets just say for arguments sake that only one continent was known for thousands of years. then it would all make sense would'nt it. Only the animal species on that continent would have to go on the ark and the flood would have been alot less water. What do you all think?

[WhiteWings]

The land (not earth) flooded was most likely the part where the previous part of Genesis took place.
Likely the Tigris-Euphrates valley east of Israel
The first civilization of the Sumerians was formed here. Writing, math and astronomy. Writings found dating back 3500 BC
Eden in Sumerian means plain. Possibly referring to the large plain in the lower  Tigris-Euphrates valley. Very fertile. Paradise like....
Rivers Tigris and Euphrates in Iraq => rising of the waters would cause a flood.
Ancient Sumerian records speak of before and after the flood which took place 2800 BC
In 1929 archeologist Sir Charles Woolley reported that excavations near the Euphrates river revealed water-deposited layers of soil ten feet deep.

[Molly]

17And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

--Gen 6


I don't think it's a bad idea, especially given the word for 'earth'.


"earth"

H776
ארץ
'erets
eh'-rets
From an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land): -  X common, country, earth, field, ground, land, X nations, way, + wilderness, world.


In other words, the word could mean the whole world, but it seems it could also mean a part of the world.

In fact, the flood is taking place in the area that Adam was first created, and Noah didn't really travel that far in the ark.  Ararat is on the far boundary of Mesopotamia.   It's not like the ark settled in the Rocky Mountains or something.   The story is still unfolding in the Middle East after the flood, as it was before the flood.

[WhiteWings]

Genesis 7:20  Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
15 cubits is about 7 metes. The water did rise 7 meters
*The  water did rise 7 meters above the hills?
**No, because peaks have different heights so the water can't be 7 meters above all of them at the same time.
*The water did rise 7 meters from ground/river level and then covered all the hills on that plain. Meaning the max hill hight was less than 7 meters.

Genesis 8:4  And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.
There is a mountain range in East Turkey previously known as Urartu. It would mean the flood extended a few hundred miles from Sumeria.
There is no evidence for that and therefore it's likely that the name similarity is just a coincidence.
It would also mean the Ark was carried upstream because the source of the Tigris lays in the Urartu mountains. in Turkey
Even if the Ark didn't settle on the highest peak of Urartu it would mean it was carried upstream.
Same problems if the other Turkish mountains Ararat was meant.

The Hebrew text writes Ahrurut; meaning hill or something high.
Higest point of the valley.

7 meters above the highest mountain worldwide requires 3.5x the water on all the planet.
Liquid+ice+vapor

[Molly]

There was a scientist a while ago who postulated that a huge amount of water came rushing through the Gibralter staits, flooding the middle east.  I can't remember the details of why this would have occurred (melting glaciers? eathquakes?).

However, we do have the strange occurrence of the Dead Sea, a salt water land locked lake below sea level.  No matter what the geologists postulate about its formation, it is strange. 

If the flood included the salt waters of the ocean covering that area, it would give an explanation for the high salt density of the Dead Sea.  It is so salty, nothing can live in it.

It is also the lowest point on the surface of the earth.

[Tony N]

There are some problems with a local flood theory.

Why would Noah take 100 years to build an ark the size of a world war II aircraft carrier if the flood was to be a local flood? He could have gathered the animals and walked a couple days out of the mesopotamian valley.

That valley was only about 200 miles wide by arout 500 miles long max. I don't think all the people in the world could have fit in that valley especially when there were at least 1 billion people on the planet back then.

If the flood was local and God told Noah He would set the rainbow in the sky as a reminder to never flood a small area again then He lied.

Jesus spoke of the flood as a truth Matt.24.

The writer of Hebrews believe that the flood was real and the world was condemned back then (Heb. 11)

Peter took the flood as a literal event in 1Peter 3.

Where did all the water come from? How could Mt. Everest be covered by water? Who says Mt. Everest was as high back then as it is today?

Could not God multiply the waters as Christ did the fish and loaves of bread? Could not God multiply the waters as Elisha did the oil for the poor woman as in 2 Kings 4? or Elijah did with the corn mean and oil in 1 Kings 17?

Have faith! Our God is increddibly powerful!

Tony

[DeeDee]

There are some problems with a local flood theory.

Why would Noah take 100 years to build an ark the size of a world war II aircraft carrier if the flood was to be a local flood? He could have gathered the animals and walked a couple days out of the mesopotamian valley.

I see it as more a continental flood then a local one. Could have been Africa or Asia. Those are large continents.

That valley was only about 200 miles wide by arout 500 miles long max. I don't think all the people in the world could have fit in that valley especially when there were at least 1 billion people on the planet back then.

I did'nt know the Bible said there were 1billion people back then? Anyhow again I say not necessarily one valley full of people but more a continent.

If the flood was local and God told Noah He would set the rainbow in the sky as a reminder to never flood a small area again then He lied.

A whole continent is not a small area hun.

Jesus spoke of the flood as a truth Matt.24.

The writer of Hebrews believe that the flood was real and the world was condemned back then (Heb. 11)

Peter took the flood as a literal event in 1Peter 3.

Where did all the water come from? How could Mt. Everest be covered by water? Who says Mt. Everest was as high back then as it is today?

Could not God multiply the waters as Christ did the fish and loaves of bread? Could not God multiply the waters as Elisha did the oil for the poor woman as in 2 Kings 4? or Elijah did with the corn mean and oil in 1 Kings 17?

there was definately a flood because scripture mentions it and scripture does not lie. My point is just that I don't think all the continents were populated back then. Its just my opinion tho.

God Bless
Dee

[WhiteWings]

Have faith! Our God is increddibly powerful!

I started with you last sentance.
Yes. Agreed. But God also seems often to use natural ways to punish. Frog, locustus, famine, etc

Why would Noah take 100 years to build an ark the size of a world war II aircraft carrier if the flood was to be a local flood? He could have gathered the animals and walked a couple days out of the mesopotamian valley.

It's not so sure it's 100 year. English text writes years. Hebrew seems to write something life 'repeatings'
That indeed can be years. But also seasons for example.

That valley was only about 200 miles wide by arout 500 miles long max. I don't think all the people in the world could have fit in that valley especially when there were at least 1 billion people on the planet back then.

Firstly the Hebrew more likely states land not world/earth.
Bible story was always centred around a certain group of people. Did you ever read something about Europe, Amerika, Australia in the Bible? They never got judged for good or bad.
About a billion people. Far less I think.

If the flood was local and God told Noah He would set the rainbow in the sky as a reminder to never flood a small area again then He lied.

As far as I understand it the rainbow was always in the sky. It wasn't created for that goal.
God just said just something like: Whenever you see the rainbow remember I won't flood you anymore.
Several floods appeared elsewhere in the world.

Jesus spoke of the flood as a truth Matt.24.
The writer of Hebrews believe that the flood was real and the world was condemned back then (Heb. 11)
Peter took the flood as a literal event in 1Peter 3.

Flood took place. Point is world or land where 'they' lived.

Where did all the water come from? How could Mt. Everest be covered by water? Who says Mt. Everest was as high back then as it is today?

To form a mountain range the size of the Everest and other large mountains cause immese stress in the inside of the earth.  My bet is Noach would have reported massive earthquarkes.

Could not God multiply the waters as Christ did the fish and loaves of bread? Could not God multiply the waters as Elisha did the oil for the poor woman as in 2 Kings 4? or Elijah did with the corn mean and oil in 1 Kings 17?

Yes, he could have done that and a zillion other things.

All that said the above is not just my 'I wish it is that way.'
It's mainly from a book from a Jewish scientist Torah reader that took the KJV and compared it to the Torah.
All what I wrote above is in the Torah. But yes it always boils down to interpretation of things. But his logic (that stats at Gen 1:1) seems honest. Not an attack on Torah and or Bible.
But as I said interpretation. Just like we now have ET and UR. And what causes that difference?
Many things but largely due to translations.

[WhiteWings]

I see it as more a continental flood then a local one. Could have been Africa or Asia. Those are large continents.

The problem is that if the water rises it drains into the sea if you flood a whole continent.
Unless you assume God created some barrrier that stopped flowing teh water of the continent.

[Molly]

Firstly the Hebrew more likely states land not world/earth.
Bible story was always centred around a certain group of people. Did you ever read something about Europe, Amerika, Australia in the Bible? They never got judged for good or bad.
About a billion people. Far less I think.

well I think the reason for the flood was that God was preserving a bloodline that would lead to Jesus, and the bloodline had become 'polluted'  (sons of God with daughters of men), leading all men to have evil in their hearts all of the time.  Not a good incubator for the Christ--so to speak.

[DeeDee]

I see it as more a continental flood then a local one. Could have been Africa or Asia. Those are large continents.


The problem is that if the water rises it drains into the sea if you flood a whole continent.
Unless you assume God created some barrrier that stopped flowing teh water of the continent.

Could very well be, or my theory that continental drifting had not yet taken place can also account.

[WhiteWings]

Continental drift?
You assume at the time of the flood all continents where still one?
The drift that still occurs goes very slowly. Drifting many 1000 miles even in 4000 year is immensly fast for such processes. Unless ofcourse God 'helped'.

But then the same problem occurs. Or even bigger. The water drains of the continent and the continent is much larger (more water needed)

[DeeDee]

Continental drift?
You assume at the time of the flood all continents where still one?
The drift that still occurs goes very slowly. Drifting many 1000 miles even in 4000 year is immensly fast for such processes. Unless ofcourse God 'helped'.

But then the same problem occurs. Or even bigger. The water drains of the continent and the continent is much larger (more water needed)

Yes I suppose the one continent flooded theory is better then the continental drifting theory. God could have used mountains as a barrier or anything in fact. What you think?

[WhiteWings]

Most shores are low.
No mountainranges there.

[DeeDee]

I meant as temporary borders. Remember aswell that land is not even i.e it lays at different levels above sea water. The escarpment is at different levels. This could also come into play.

[SeekerSA]

The flood is at best a myth or a folklore story related to a region.

Polar Bears?  Penguins?  Lions are carnivores, what did they eat for 40 days?

As for taking 100 years to build, that could well be just an add on to make it seem plausible.  I do not think we are the first to question this.  Back then they may not have understood the food chain as we do today.

If you want t to be true then you have to deny logic and introduce suppositions that are extra biblical.

Fresh water fish?  Flies only live 4 days or so, snakes like the anaconda from S. America, the kangaroo from Aus?

The giant asteroid also fails as the impact to generate a huge world wide tsunami would also have released energy multiple times the Hiroshima bomb..

You need to consider fresh water algae too which likely would not survive salty water and visa versa, salty water animals that would not survive fresh water.

Even the USA have unique to region animals.

[DeeDee]

http://www.westarkchurchofchrist.org/library/noahsark.htm

[Tony N]

1stly, If the world-wide flood in Noah's day was just a myth then why did Jesus, the writer of Hebrews and Peter speak of it as fact?

2ndly, if the flood in Noah's day was just localized on that continent, this does not make sense. Think about it. For the flood waters to get above the tallest mountains on that continent the flood waters would have to be above all the lower mountains on the other continents. Unless God built an invisible wall around that continent that was 7 cubits taller than the tallest mountain on that continent and all the other continents remained dry. Highly laughable at best.

3rdly, just because continental drift is very slow today does not mean it was very slow not long after the flood in the days of Peleg when the nations were parted. There could have been one continent called Pangea back then.

The only survivors to the world-wide flood was Noah and family and animals on their ark sans fish. Well, they might have had a pet guppy.  :dontknow:

[DeeDee]

Read the link I pasted above your post.

[Tony N]

Read the link I pasted above your post.

Thanks for the link DeeDee! Very good! It is a shame that some believers can't take God at His word.

[WhiteWings]

It is a shame that some believers can't take God at His word.

The point here is that it very well possible that it is you that doesn't take God at His word.
Please don't start twisting what I (others) wrote! :sigh:
I'm simply saying that the Hebrew leaves a much higher possibility for a local flood.
And as far as I'm concerned the Hebrew is closer to Gods word than the English translation.
There is much more to it but simply check Strong for the word world was translated from.
Then look at it's various meanings.
My KJV tells me hell is eternal.... get my point?

[Tony N]

It is a shame that some believers can't take God at His word.

The point here is that it very well possible that it is you that doesn't take God at His word.
Please don't start twisting what I (others) wrote! :sigh:

Dear friend, no need to take offense. I don't believe I twisted anything you wrote.

I'm simply saying that the Hebrew leaves a much higher possibility for a local flood.

Tony's reply:
It actually leaves a lesser possibility of a local flood.

And as far as I'm concerned the Hebrew is closer to Gods word than the English translation.

Tony's reply: Agreed.

There is much more to it but simply check Strong for the word world was translated from.
Then look at it's various meanings.
My KJV tells me hell is eternal.... get my point?

The New Testament writers, under inspiration of God says it was the world that perished:

Heb 11:7 By faith Noah, being apprized concerning that which is not as yet being observed, being pious, constructs an ark for the salvation of his house, through which he condemns the world, and became an enjoyer of the allotment of the righteousness which accords with faith."

We know that by "world" it references all mankind such as when it is stated that "God so loved the world." It is not saying that God loved the land and so gave His Son so that the land could be saved.

Peter states that only eight souls were saved. He doesn't say, nor does Christ or the writer of Hebrews nor the writer of Genesis that many people were not affected by the flood:
1Pe 3:20 He heralds to those once stubborn, when the patience of God awaited in the days of Noah while the ark was being constructed, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were brought safely through water,

God said He would destroy man that He created from the surface of the ground. (Gen.6:7 Concordant Version). He didn't intimate that some continents would be spared. He didn't say that some of mankind were not doing evil. Just Noah and family found grace. The rest of humanity He created did not.

Please do not take offense where none should be taken. We can keep cool heads here.

One other verse I just remembered:
2Pe 3:6 through which the then world, being deluged by water, perished."2Pe 3:7 Yet the heavens now, and the earth, by the same word, are stored with fire, being kept for the day of the judging and destruction of irreverent men."

The world of Noah's day was deluged by water. We are living on a new earth that came out of that flood. In the future the earth will be destroyed by fire and a new earth will come out of that conflagration. I don't think it leaves any room for a local fire in someone's back yard or a continent getting burned up. Thus also, it leaves no room for a flood in someone's back yard or on their single continent.

[WhiteWings]

Dear friend, no need to take offense. I don't believe I twisted anything you wrote.

You wrote:

It is a shame that some believers can't take God at His word.

With that you claim I'm twisting Gods words. And because I said I've read those word in the Hebrew text you twist my words by saying they find no basis in the word of God. That you don't agree that's no problem with me.

First a general remark it might seem off-topic but I think it's a very important framework...
Science finds no support for global floods. Change in the earth layout (mountains and oceans formed after the flood)
Surely God is very capable of hidding things; but for me that doesn't fit with His character.
He also could have done the flood with a miracle. But that also doesn't really look like God's way of doing things.
He seems to prefer things found in nature. For example plague of frogs, the water of the flood, locustus etc.
There is also a verse that states that Gods handiwork can be seen in nature.

The New Testament writers, under inspiration of God says it was the world that perished:

The OT wasn't inspired? That's a retorical question....

Heb 11:7 By faith Noah, being apprized concerning that which is not as yet being observed, being pious, constructs an ark for the salvation of his house, through which he condemns the world, and became an enjoyer of the allotment of the righteousness which accords with faith."

We know that by "world" it references all mankind such as when it is stated that "God so loved the world." It is not saying that God loved the land and so gave His Son so that the land could be saved.

The Bible likes to use strong wording sometimes or translation is wrong. I small example:
Exodus 21:6   Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.

A verse that uses world while in the same verse it clairfies it's Egypt.
Exodus 10:15  For they covered the face of the whole earth, so that the land was darkened; and they did eat every herb of the land, and all the fruit of the trees which the hail had left: and there remained not any green thing in the trees, or in the herbs of the field, through all the land of Egypt.

World:
2889 ko,smoj kosmos {kos'-mos}
Meaning:  1) an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government 2) ornament, decoration, adornment, i.e. the arrangement of the stars, 'the heavenly hosts', as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Pet. 3:3 3) the world, the universe 4) the circle of the earth, the earth 5) the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human race 6) the ungodly multitude; the whole mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the cause of Christ 7) world affairs, the aggregate of things earthly 7a) the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments riches, advantages, pleasures, etc, which although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir desire, seduce from God and are obstacles to the cause of Christ 8) any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort 8a) the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Rom. 11:12 etc) 8a) of believers only, John 1:29; 3:16; 3:17; 6:33; 12:47 1 Cor. 4:9; 2 Cor. 5:19

Strong gives many meanings of the word world. And indeed also the whole world.
The red is clear I guess.
The blue: Who where the men alienated from God. Just everyone on the whole planet except those on the Ark or, by lack of better words, the group that would have become Israel?
The whole OT is focussing on 'the way to become Israel'
It follows certain key persons. Other nations are only mentioned if they cross the path of the key persons.
Understand what I'm trying to say?

Peter states that only eight souls were saved. He doesn't say, nor does Christ or the writer of Hebrews nor the writer of Genesis that many people were not affected by the flood:
1Pe 3:20 He heralds to those once stubborn, when the patience of God awaited in the days of Noah while the ark was being constructed, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were brought safely through water,

It's clearly stated 8 souls are saved. Agreed. But 8 souls of what group?
Indeed the group could be whole mankind. But because the things I've mentioned above I'm just not very sure about that.

God said He would destroy man that He created from the surface of the ground. (Gen.6:7 Concordant Version). He didn't intimate that some continents would be spared. He didn't say that some of mankind were not doing evil. Just Noah and family found grace. The rest of humanity He created did not.

Earth 0127 hm'd'a] 'adamah {ad-aw-maw'}
Meaning:  1) ground, land 1a) ground (as general, tilled, yielding sustenance) 1b) piece of ground, a specific plot of land 1c) earth substance (for building or constructing) 1d) ground as earth's visible surface 1e) land, territory, country 1f) whole inhabited earth 1g) city in Naphtali

Many meaning are local. But there is also a whole earth as a meaning.

Please do not take offense where none should be taken. We can keep cool heads here.

Using words like: "believe God word", "inspired NT" give me a bad feeling. I won't argue for a second the quotes a true.
It's just that they are present to give extra 'force' to your world and thereby claiming my words come from another source than the Bible. I truely believe the Bible/Torah is inspired. I also truely believe lots of translation error crept in.
Plus I believe nobody, except Father/Son/HS, understand the Bible 100%
I'm just digging for the truth; meaning getting closer to the origibal word of God.
I've similar 'things' about Genesis. Again based on the OT itself. But I fear several on this board can't handle things that require them to think outside the box they believe in. I find that a shame. But a starting a fight doesn't help my understanding so I won't post until Martin answers my PM regarding thos topics.

One other verse I just remembered:
2Pe 3:6 through which the then world, being deluged by water, perished."2Pe 3:7 Yet the heavens now, and the earth, by the same word, are stored with fire, being kept for the day of the judging and destruction of irreverent men."

The world of Noah's day was deluged by water. We are living on a new earth that came out of that flood. In the future the earth will be destroyed by fire and a new earth will come out of that conflagration. I don't think it leaves any room for a local fire in someone's back yard or a continent getting burned up. Thus also, it leaves no room for a flood in someone's back yard or on their single continent.

World. See the other Peter verse above

[Paul Hazelwood]

Read the link I pasted above your post.

Thanks for the link DeeDee! Very good! It is a shame that some believers can't take God at His word.

The problem with statements such as this is there are many ways to point out Gods word. And just in UR Tony, you might possibly say this to a believer in Eternal Hell, then they would show you the verse where Jesus says some will awaken to everlasting punishment.

Of course there are bibles with that written specifically, so "Why do you not just believe Gods word"?

The Hebrew word that is translated to the english word  earth is not defined as the whole earth.

H776  'erets  eh'-rets

from an unused root probably meaning to be firm;

the earth (at large, or partitively a land):--X common, country, earth, field,
ground, land, X natins, way, + wilderness, world.

The parenthesis after earth qualify the definition to the most likely meaning.

A flood said to have covered a mountain is taking the perspective of how the terrain is now.   

It is not allowing for the scientific knowledge (that both creation scientists and mainstream scientists cannot refute) of upliftment that shows that the earths terrain was much flatter long ago than it is now.

Creationism further complicates the matter by an unproven stance that the bible plainly speaks of a 6000 year old earth.  It does not, it is an implication through their interpretation only, but they will not admit it.  To say "why not just believe Gods word" in this case is in error because Gods word makes no such statement.   You must then "believe what they tell you it means".

From a local perspective something called a mountain may have looked entirely different than it does now.

Gn 7:20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.



Only 15 cubits to cover the highest mountain on the whole earth? 15 cubits is in the range of 20 to 30 feet.


The Hebrew for mountain is not a pure suggestion of the huge ranges of what we call mountains in modern day.

H2022  har  har

a shortened form of H2042;

a mountain or range of hills (sometimes used figuratively):--hill (country),
mount(-ain), X  promotion.
The usage of the word along with the measurement that is cited in the verse implies that Gods word is not talking about the entire globe.

[Nathan]

Isn't it interesting how our minds try to put things together that were spiritually built?  How did Adam acquire blood for his veins?  We get defensive at the idea that either there was a flood or there wasn't . .or .. because our natural reasoning can not see how the events could physically happen, we question the extent in which things happened.  

Elijah went 40 days without eating . .Moses did it twice in a row.  Elisha oversaw an old lady with an almost empty jar of oil fill her entire house with that almost empty jar.  

There are stories upon stories in Scripture that natural reasoning can not explain.  Noah's ark is only one of many.  Like I shared in another thread, our minds are the masters of distractions.  God didn't have this event documented so that 5,000 years later we'd come along and try to physically prove or disprove it happened.  He documented it for the same reasons he had men document all of the other indescribable events . . .they paint a picture of his nature . .they form a pattern of his promise, they unveil the character of the Christ.  The flesh profits nothing in this.

Whether the flood was local or earth-wide isn't the theme of what's going on here.  The purpose of the story is to reveal that Christ is your ark, we are hid in him.  Just as the ark was covered with pitch . .which is tar . ..inside and out . .when you look at the original definition of the word, you'll find it's actual meaning is "atonement".  

It came to rest on Mt. Ararat . . .meaning?  The curse is reversed.  

Jesus stated that as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the time of the coming of the son of man . . .Know what Noah means?  Rest.  In the Day of rest . .we just spoke of this on the other thread dealing with the Sabbath . . .Jesus will reveal himself in the Day of Rest.

Proving the phyisical piece of the story get's us no where.  Nobody was there, no one can prove anything.  If we begin focusing on the physical plain, it will be much more difficult to enter into the spiritual because the physical one births doubt that it ever happened at all.  And doubt can not enter into the spirit realm . . .

Say it didn't happen physcially, is that going to change anything?  Say just the opposite happened . .say that it all happened exactly as it appears to state it did . . .is that going to change anything?  it takes faith to believe anything that God says or does . . . when we begin trying to prove or disprove what he's said . . . we've left the spirit for our flesh . .there's no end to the opinions of what literally happened and there's also no winning the conversations.  Just something to think about.