Saturday, July 26, 2014

The Flood - Global or Regional?

I noticed that some Christians are trying to "sanitized" their Bible and I think the best example is the flood story.

According to these Christians, the flood is just a regional event and not a catastrophe of global proportion... Regional? Well, now... It seems some Christians (who are called "regionalists" ) are now in agreement with skeptics huh?

Frankly, I find this tactic a joke.

Are they now saying the flood is a regional event because it's really hard to justify a global flood? The bad news here is that the Bible is talking about a global deluge. If the story is just a regional event as these Christian "regionalists" are now trying to justify, then why will the Hebrew god order Noah and his family to build an ark? I think it will be more easy for God and Noah to transfer to a place where the flood waters will not reach him.

Second, why will God need Noah to gather all animals in pair? You will not need to re-populate the Earth is the flood is just a regional event.

OK, so according to this one "regionalist."

In short, according to his bluster, the Bible doesn't believe in a world-wide flood that covered Planet Earth.

It seems these Christian "regionalists" are agreeing with the non-believers in this issue.

In the issue concerning the flood, the "regionalists" believed that the flood of Noah was a Euphrates River flood in southern Sumer similar to the flood of 1954 in southern Iraq. The "earth" in Genesis 7:17-18 refers to the ground/land in the flooded region, not the entire planet.

Unfortunately for them, the majority of Christians doesn't agree with their bullcrap.

First, if it's just a local flood, then how can it cover the highest mountains (Gen. 7:20). For example, the record emphasizes that "all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven . . . and the mountains were covered" (Genesis 7:19,20) with the waters of the Flood. This must have included Mount Ararat on which Noah's Ark landed, and which is now 17,000 feet high. This was no local flood!

Secondly, and even more significant is the covenant which God made after the Flood. God promised, "Never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth." (Gen. 9:11).

According to Peter, "And did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly." (II Peter 2:5).

The apostle Peter believed in a worldwide hydraulic cataclysm. "Whereby the world [Greek, kosmos] that then was, being overflowed [Greek, katakluzo] with water, perished" (II Peter 3:6). The "world" was defined in the previous verse as "the heavens . . . and the earth." Peter also said that "God . . . spared not the old world, but saved Noah . . . bringing in the flood [Greek, kataklusmos] upon the world of the ungodly" (II Peter 2:5). Note also that these words katakluzo and kataklusmos (from which we derive our English word "cataclysm") are applied exclusively in the New Testament to the great Flood of Noah's day.

Peter says "a world" or cosmos as affected. Genesis 7:21-24 continues: "So ALL FLESH that was moving upon the earth expired, among the flying creatures and among the domestic animals and among the wild beasts and among ALL the swarms that were swarming upon the earth, and ALL MANKIND. EVERYTHING in which the breath of the force of life was active in its nostrils, namely, ALL that were on the dry ground, died. Thus he wiped out EVERY EXISTING THING that was on the surface of the ground, from man to beast, to moving animal and to flying creature of the heavens, and they were wiped off the earth; and ONLY Noah and those who were with him in the ark kept on surviving. And the waters continued overwhelming the earth a hundred and fifty days."

The writer of Hebrews believed it as a worldwide flood.

"By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith." (Hebrews 11:7).

So maybe we can ask these "regionalists" :

1. Why would Noah have to gather animals if the flood was local and these species would either escape or already lived in other regions?

2. Why is the Biblical account written the way it is if this flood was just a local event?

English vs. Hebrew

Oh, here's another of the "regionalists" issue and this time they have to use their so-called knowledge in Hebrew (talk about dead language)
The issue regarding the hebrew word "erets"

"Regionalists" claim: 

So, does the word "eret" only means a regional land? Nope. It can mean the whole planet Earth.

In Genesis 1:1, 2 the word "earth" here is 'erets (possibly, "firm") and may mean merely "land" though in some places in may refer to the world or the globe. The Septuagint version (LXX) used for the word gen (or, ge) to translate `erets. From this word we get geology and geography.

And so it all boil down to this, as stated by a so-called "most sensible preacher" that is a die-hard "regionalist"...

Oh really?

Let me emphasize that even Jesus believed in a worldwide flood.

"But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be." (Matthew 24:37-39).

So does that mean Peter, Paul and Jesus doesn't understand the scriptures and are a bunch of imaginary idiots?

Ikaw na !

No comments: