Noah's Flood

[DMcFadden]

Not to get off-topic but is the "earth looked different" argument ever used to explain plate tectonic theory?

Not off topic at all. YEC folks used to fight plate tectonics rabidly. Now that Dr. Baumgardner’s work has shown that rapid subduction could account for the phenomena of plate tectonics in a catastrophic model (e.g., world wide flood), AiG and other creationist organizations have adopted it as plausible.

 

[ReformedSinner]

Local flood is not a give-in to humanism at all. Many good solid conservative Reformed Christians believed in local flood and their exegesis is solid, maybe not a put-down argument but definitely worthy of consideration as alternative answer to the question at hand. The point that why doesn't God just tell Noah to move to China is irrelevant, the point is that God WANTS Noah to WITNESS His act of judgment on the sinfulness of humankind around him.

As for 2 Peter's use of parallelism with Noah's flood. Very good point, but also not the only answer. NT has always taken the liberty of expanding OT imagery or event to a fuller, more complete fulfillment in light of Christ. Peter could of very well have known it's a local flood, but the incident itself significes God's future complete destruction of sinful earth as a whole in light of Christ.

The truth is I don't really have an answer for I evaluate both sides and realized both sides have equally significant exegetical "proofs" to back up their theory. And no the local flood gang didn't just use extra-biblical humanism as their only answer.

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Rev. Chen:

I have not seen any decent exegesis from those who hold to the local flood theory. Maybe you can point me to a website or two?

Certainly, if it was a local flood Noah would not have to carry birds in the Ark? Gen. 6:20.

When God created a local destruction - such as Sodom and Gomorrah - he simply told Lot to leave.

Thanks in advance,

-CH

 

[Grymir]

If God was planning a local flood, then why did he not instruct Noah to just move out of the way? To China or Egypt until the flood was over?

Precisely. To be truthful, this idea of a local flood just sounds like another compromise with humanism. Is the Bible infallible, or is human reason/scientific findings our infallible guide? Personally, I am tired of this sort of compromise.

YES!!!! and Mega Ditto's Daniel!!!! The local flood theory is just another weak attempt to discredit the Bible in the eyes of the world. If a lie is repeated long enough, people start to believe it. The fossils and plate tectonics have been a part of YEC. (The foundations of the deep opened up in Gen.) Yes, Kangaroos were once in the middle east.

There were no poodles on the Ark with Noah either!

 

[bookslover]

Edward Stillingfleet (Origines Sacrae) and Matthew (Synopsis and Annotations at Genesis 7.19) both allow that the deluge need not have been universal over the entire geographic earth, as long as it is reckoned to be universal with respect to covering all areas populated by man and beast.

Synopsis:

It is not necessary to conclude that the flood was universal with respect to the entire earth, but only with respect to the human race: Now, it is in no way probable that the entire earth, in the space of the one thousand, six hundred and fifty-six years before the flood, was inhabited by men, since, in a much longer space from the flood, it has not be occupied. If, therefore, we suppose that the animals were increased in the earth in greater numbers and more diffusedly than men (which seems most probable to me, since the production of animals happens by the same method as the production of fish, by the productive or prolific virtue both of the land and of the water granted by God, Genesis 1:20, 21, 24), it can be said that not all living things were blotted out, but those only which were inhabiting the same parts of the earth as men. Objection: But all animals are said to be destroyed. Response: This is certainly true to the extent the flood was spreading itself: However, it was not at all necessary that the destruction of them should extend beyond the boundaries of that part of the earth which men were inhabiting. For, since the occasion of this flood was the sin of men, who were punished in the animals, which were destroyed only for their sakes, it was unnecessary to extend it further. A further question: But to what end was God directing with such great care all of the animals to be introduced into the ark, unless all things would perish in the flood? Response: Let us posit that the flood overtook all Asia, or even the whole world, formerly known and habitable (but not America): could it not be that this was a sufficient reason why the beasts would be preserved in the ark, namely, for the use of the men then living, to whom the animals, scattered at so great a distance and already made savage, would in no way be serviceable (Stillingfleet’s Origines Sacræ 3:4).

Annotations:

Gen 7:19. Profane wits pretend this to be impossible, because of the vast height of divers mountains. But, 1. This cannot be thought impossible by any man that believeth a God; to whom it was as easy to bring forth a sufficiency of water, for this end, as to speak a word. And if we acknowledge a miracle of the Divine power and providence here, it is no more than even heathens have confessed in other cases. 2. Peradventure this flood might not be simply universal over the whole earth, but only over all the habitable world, where either men or beasts lived; which was as much as either the meritorious cause of the flood, men's sins, or the end of it, the destruction of all men and beasts, required. And the or that whole heaven may be understood of that which was over all the habitable parts of it. And whereas our modern heathens, that miscall themselves Christians, laugh at the history of this flood upon this and the like occasions, as if it were an idle romance; they may please to note, that their predecessors, the ancient and wiser heathens, have divers of them acknowledged the truth of it, though they also mixed it with their fables, which was neither strange nor unusual for them to do. Lactantius appeals to the heathens of his age concerning it. Nay, there is not only mention of the flood in general, but also of the dove sent out of the ark, in Plutarch, and Berosus, and Abydenus. And the memory of this general flood is preserved to this day among the poor ignorant Indians, who asked the Christians who invaded their land, whether they ever heard of such a thing, and whether another flood was to be expected? And the Chinese writers relate, that but one person, whom they call Puoncuus, with his family, were saved in the flood, and all the rest perished.

So, the water only went where it knew the people and animals were, leaving those places empty of people and animals alone? Hmmmmmm.

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

Rev. Chen:

I have not seen any decent exegesis from those who hold to the local flood theory. Maybe you can point me to a website or two?

Certainly, if it was a local flood Noah would not have to carry birds in the Ark? Gen. 6:20.

When God created a local destruction - such as Sodom and Gomorrah - he simply told Lot to leave.

Thanks in advance,

-CH

Excellent Points.

 

[JBaldwin]

How long have biblical scholars been questioning the world wide flood? I've always been under the impression that the "local flood" theories were generated from liberal scholars around the same time that other parts of the Scriptures (such as God parting the Red Sea) were being questioned, i.e. is during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Didn't the church traditionally hold to the worldwide flood view until that time?

Does anyone know what Calvin, Luther and others believed?

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

From Calvin's Commentary on Genesis:

17. And the flood was forty days , etc. Moses copiously insists upon this fact, in order to show that the whole world was immersed in the waters. Moreover, it is to be regarded as the special design of this narrations that we should not ascribe to fortune, the flood by which the world perished; how ever customary it may be for men to cast some veil over the works of God, which may obscure either his goodness or his judgments manifested in them. But seeing it is plainly declared, that whatever was flourishing on the earth was destroyed, we hence infer, that it was an indisputable and signal judgment of God; especially since Noah alone remained secure, because he had embraced, by faith, the word in which salvation was contained. He then recalls to memory what we before have said; namely how desperate had been the impiety, and how enormous the crimes of men, by which God was induced to destroy the whole world; whereas, on account of his great clemency, he would have spared his own workmanship, had he seen that any milder remedy could have been effectually applied. These two things, directly opposed to each other, he connects together; that the whole human race was destroyed, but that Noah and his family safely escaped. Hence we learn how profitable it was for Noah, disregarding the world, to obey God alone: which Moses states not so much for the sake of praising the man, as for that of inviting us to imitate his example. Moreover, lest the multitude of sinners should draw us away from God; we must patiently bear that the ungodly should hold us up to ridicule, and should triumph over us, until the Lord shall show by the final issue, that our obedience has been approved by him. In this sense, Peter teaches that Noah’s deliverance from the universal deluge was a figure of baptism, (1 Peter 3:21 as if he had said, the method of the salvation, which we receive through baptism, degrees with this deliverance of Noah. Since at this time also the world is full of unbelievers as it was then; therefore it is necessary for us to separate ourselves from the greater multitude, that the Lord may snatch us from destruction. In the same manner, the Church is fitly, and justly, compared to the ark. But we must keep in mind the similitude by which they mutually correspond with each other; for that is derived from the word of God alone; because as Noah believing the promise of God, gathered himself his wife and his children together, in order that under a certain appearance of death, he might emerge out of death; so it is fitting that we should renounce the world and die, in order that the Lord may quicken us by his word. For nowhere else is there any security of salvation. The Papists, however, act ridiculously who fabricate for us an ark without the word.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Genesis 6:7:

And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air...

6:17:

And behold [saith the LORD], 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.

7:19:

And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

7:20:

Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

7:21:

And all flesh that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:

7:22:

All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

-------

Does it not sound as if the LORD were making irrefutably clear what He did?

 

[TimV]

Yes, it's clear. And rainbows are everywhere, not just in the Mideast.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Hello Shawn, I want to respond to your remarks (post #4) because they bring up a good question.

Side note:

This is slightly off topic but it is something to think about.

If God promised Noah and his descendants (all mankind) that he would never again destroy the whole earth (by flood), then why do so many Christians not believe this promise and teach that God will destroy the earth, but this time by fire?

That does not sound like much of a promise "I promise not to destroy the earth again, by water (fingers crossed)..but I will destory it by fire"

e.g., I punched my neigbor in the nose because he deserved it...then I promise to never punch him again..(because next time I will hit him with a hammer).
That is not much of a promise.

Personally, I take God's promise as secure, that he will never again destroy the earth...(but when he promised that to Noah, it just so happens to fall within the context of the flood)

This is what the LORD actually promised,

"...neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done...(Gen 8:21)

I establish My covenant with you, and with your seed after you...neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth....the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh." (Gen 9:9, 11, 15)​

I preached on the flood (and the final judgment) to a tribe of primitive Africans that had never seen a boat, although they had a pond near them. I told them to envision a house that floated on the water. They understood that the flood was not simply "destruction" but a cleansing of the earth from the evil that had overrun it. And in the final judgment, seeing as God's people were now too many to put on a boat, God sent His Son and all who were "in Him" (I often illustrated this with a bottle of water with a leaf in it) these would not perish when the final flood of fire came, because everyone who had the Spirit of the Son in him or her would be fireproof, and would not burn, but the fire would be a joy to them.

He will not smite every living thing again because now there is a vast multitude of people who belong to Him — the holy nation which shall be the new humanity dwelling on the cleansed and renewed earth — so the fire Peter speaks of in 2 Peter 2, and Malachi in his 4th chapter, is a ridding of all that causes death and sin and defilement (Rev 21:27), that God may keep His promise to His Son's Bride that when He makes all things new, and wipes all tears from her eyes,

"...there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away." (Rev 21:4)​

It is the fire of purification, the prelude to joy.

This is why we call on people to seek refuge in Him in whose heart is the fountain of eternal youth, that they perish not with those who love death.