Noah's flood Scripturally...

Where did you get your graduate degree? Are you in command of your ally?

 

OK, let us follow the Berean example ...

YOU SAID:

When did the flood begin?

• [Gen 7:10-11 NASB] 10 It came about after the seven days, that the water of the flood came upon the earth. 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.
  • So the 17th day of the second month agrees with scripture.

When did the flood end? Was it 150 days?

• [Gen 7:12 NASB] 12 The rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights.
  • So the RAIN ended after 40 days
  • Is that the end of the Flood?

• [Gen 7:17-19 NASB] 17 Then the flood came upon the earth for forty days, and the water increased and lifted up the ark, so that it rose above the earth. 18 The water prevailed and increased greatly upon the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 The water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered.
  • The flood waters covered the mountains on day 40.

• [Gen 7:24 NASB] 24 The water prevailed upon the earth one hundred and fifty days.
  • The water covered the Earth for 150 days, but may or may not have covered the mountains. Scripture does not say that water still covered the highest mountain. Scripture does not say that water did not cover the highest mountain. Scripture says that the Earth was still flooded ("water prevailed) on day 150.

• [Gen 8:1-4 NASB] 1 But God remembered Noah and all the beasts and all the cattle that were with him in the ark; and God caused a wind to pass over the earth, and the water subsided. 2 Also the fountains of the deep and the floodgates of the sky were closed, and the rain from the sky was restrained; 3 and the water receded steadily from the earth, and at the end of one hundred and fifty days the water decreased. 4 In the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat.
  • Scripture says that the rain stopped and the waters "receded steadily from the earth", which we know from Gen 7:12 began on day 40.
  • 17th day of the seventh month: "at the end of one hundred and fifty days the water decreased" and "the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat".
  • Is that the end of the flood?

• [Gen 8:5 NASB] 5 The water decreased steadily until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains became visible.
  • The water continued to steadily decrease until the 1st day of the tenth month when other mountain tops became visible. Thus the earth was still flooded on day 284.
  • Is the appearance of other mountain tops the end of the flood?

• [Gen 8:13 NASB] 13 Now it came about in the six hundred and first year, in the first [month,] on the first of the month, the water was dried up from the earth. Then Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and behold, the surface of the ground was dried up.
  • On day 313, Noah was able to look out of the Ark and see dry ground.
  • Is day 313 the end of the flood?

• [Gen 8:14-16 NASB] 14 In the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry. 15 Then God spoke to Noah, saying, 16 "Go out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and your sons' wives with you.
  • On day 370, God says the earth was dry and commands Noah to leave the Ark.
  • Is day 370 the end of the flood?

Your claim that the flood ended on day 150 is false.
Your claim that I falsely accused you of not agreeing with scripture is also false (as shown above).
This would be splitting hairs except for your very next point which builds upon the false "150th day" narrative (see below) ...

Where to begin ...

"Adam's Earth" is a meaningless phrase, since we live on the same Earth that Adam did. The difference is that Adam knew it before God cursed it and we must endure it in its present condition. By emphasizing "Adam's Earth" you appear to be heading towards a false and contra-biblical conclusion.

• "Adam's Earth" appears nowhere in scripture either verbatim or as a concept. It is certainly not found in Genesis 7 or 8.

"The flood was above the mountains ... on the 150th day after the flood began Gen 7:20-24"

• As detailed above, Genesis 7:20-24 says no such thing. The flood was above the mountains by day 40 and "steadily receded" until the Ark came to rest on Mount Ararat.
  
• Note that anyone that has ever run a boat aground cat tell you that a boat can get stuck on an object still underwater (like a sandbar), so Mount Ararat MAY have been completely covered with water when the Ark came to rest on it.
• Mount Ararat may have been partially visible when the wind (Gen 8:1) blew the Ark ashore. Mount Everest may have been long above the water, but the Ark was nowhere near Mount Everest.
• The point is that the Bible is silent on all of these details, but you are filling it in with a false narrative speculating about the mountain being both covered and not covered.

"Can you tell us HOW this was possible?"

• The only mystery is where you see a mystery. If you would just read what Moses wrote more carefully ...
  • it rained for 40 days.
  • the boat floated on the rising water.
  • the water slowly receded for a LONG time.
  • after 150 days, the boat grounded on a mountain.
  • after 284 days, more mountains were visible.
  • after 370 days, God said the the flood was over and it was time to leave the Ark.

I stand by my statement ...

 

kenneth Copeland looks like he will ffg ind evidence of the lake of fire unless he repents.

 

You don't care what you say.

 

Sorry chief, another inaccurate statement. The English speaking world PURCHASES more Bibles than any other group, but the current growth in Christianity is happening in the Third World. So the word of God reaches more people in Korean and Spanish than it does in English.

So you just stick with Elizabethan English as the ONLY reliable translation of Koine Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic if that floats your boat. There is no reasoning with that position.

 

Keep in mind, he has informed us that he has special knowledge that no one else has...

 

Just the same old uniformitarian points from the atheists of the Enlightenment led by Lyell and Hutton. Now that Darwin has been proven impossible, the old earthers are trying to prove Hinduism deep time by ignoring that Noah's Flood and that the following Ice Age that lasted until 3600 years ago are responsible for the current landscape. Lyell and Hutton and others do not believe in a catastrophic worldwide flood.

This lake in Muslim Turkey has been a talking point for more than a decade. It is an old earther's talking point based on the idea that each paper-thin layer represents a year but in reality thin layers are laid down in seconds one right after another.

You are correct to throw this into the category of Kennerh Copeland kind of stuff.

 

So far, you have only supported your views with your personal opinion and Hindu theology.

 

In nature, zebras & horses don't encounter each other. Neither do many other species which can interbreed, such as lions & tigers. But I must disagree & still say Noah took at least one pair of EVERY species on the ark. Most likely, God placed them in estivation; otherwise, can you imagine the amounta food that'd hafta be carried, or the "bilge" that woulda accumulated ?

 

You live so close to Williamstown, Kentucky, that you should just go over there and examine their work. The fact that horses and zebras are widely distributed from each other 4300 years after the flood does not mean anything at all. As large as the Ark was, and Ark Encounter uses the royal cubit, it is still only something like 510 feet long, 51 feet high, and 85 feet wide. I think that they estimate around 7,000 or more pairs of animals. They had plenty of hay and it is thought that they had a mechanical system to dump waste overboard. Water could be distributed by a system of wooden pipes and troughs. They have all that worked out but I was only there for a few hours so I did not have time to study that point. They would not have had full-grown animals but "adolescent" animals with a full life ahead of them and many reproductive cycles in their life spans. So we are not looking at huge elephants and huge dinosaurs, for example, but ones large enough to survive and large enough to reproduce once off the Ark.