Johnny Skeptic

In the NASB, Genesis 6:7 says "The LORD said, 'I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.'"

Christian apoligist James Holding says that that verse supports the claim that the Bible teaches that the flood was global. I agree with Holding.

It would not make any sense for God to only be upset with humans who lived in Mesopotamia.

In the NASB, Genesis 8:21 says "The LORD smelled the soothing aroma; and the LORD said to Himself, 'I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth; and I will never again destroy every living thing, as I have done." It would not make sense for God to say that he would never again destroy every living thing only in Mesopotamia.

Some Christians who are global flood advocates argue that various cultures in other parts of the world have global flood stories, but as far as I know, none of them mention Noah and Mt. Ararat.

Obviously, if the Bible flood story is true, no non-Hebrew writer who wrote about the global flood could have been an eyewitness since only Noah's group survived the flood. In addition, the only way that
non-Hebrew writers could have learned about the flood would have been through Noah's group or their descendants, in which case, why didn't they mention Noah and Mt. Ararat, assuming that Noah's group or their descendants would have mentioned Noah and Mt. Ararat, which I assume would have been the case?

Consider the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_g..._flood_stories

James Brown

If it was local, why save animals? If it was local, why build an ark, when Noah could just migrate away from the flooded area ahead of time?

I agree. The "It was only local" argument is an attempt to meld the biblical text with scientific evidence, while devaluing both.

Sheshbazzar

Internal indicators indicate global, or at least so large that the entire mid-east would have been submerged. It didn't happen, Jewish mythology got passed off as being 'Gods words'.
"The LORD saith...the LORD saith...blah blah blah" when it was not YHWH that spoke anything only men putting their words and ideas into 'his' mouth as a means to manipulate and control their fellow man.

rizdek

It would be easy for an apologist to believe that these "other" stories of a flood would have been passed down from generation to generation, with the original story-tellers being descendants of Noah. The story (a great flood) is remembered while the names of the survivors and places involved are forgotten, or at least altered beyond recognition.

I don't think any worldwide flood occurred (at least not while humans lived) but IF I DID believe it, that's the explanation I'd give.

rizdek

Come on, what small child want's to hear a Bible story about: "Noah's Migration?" But while we are on a roll, how about the following Bible stories?

"Jonah and his Delusion?"
"David Assassinates Goliath in his Sleep."
"Moses waits for the Tide to go out."
"Moses gets abandoned by his real mother who tries to drown him in the weeds by the river."
"Lot's wife leaves him and goes back home because Lot, in a crazed hallucination believes some city is going to be destroyed and they all have to leave." or
"David and Jonathon, gay Lovers"

DancesWithCoffeeCups

Moving to BC&H.

semiopen

These are all excellent reasons.

Arnoldo tries to make a local argument based on the word haaretz in Hebrew, which can mean land or earth.

I believe this is not a strong argument because usually a specific land is qualified like eretz yisrael, etc.

Johnny Skeptic

Arnoldo is trying to get the Bible to agree with science, but it doesn't regarding the flood since the Bible teaches that the flood was global.

It is interesting to note that two of arnoldo's Christian sources for a localized flood contradict each other. Dr. Hugh Ross says that a localized flood occured in Mesopotamia. Geophysicist Glenn Morton says that a localized flood could not have occured in Mesopotamia.

Red_Geranium

The Bible is pretty clear about the flood being global. The 'localized flood' ideas didn't really become widespread (as far as I know) until science definitively ruled out the possibility of a global flood. Some biblical scholars came to realize that a global flood, approximately 6000 years ago, was an indefensible claim.

Some of them say that, if a large-enough local flood occurred, it could have easily seemed like the whole earth was flooded from the perspective of bronze-age tribesmen.

It is true that lots of cultures have flood stories; however, that should be no surprise given that almost all ancient cultures were built around rivers, lakes, and other bodies of water.

Besides, lots of evidence suggests that the Noah story is not an original. It seems to be a rip-off of an earlier Babylonian story.

Huon

This story of flood is ridiculous, either way.

If the flood was global, that shows that god was mistaken when he created the world, and especially the human species, viz. Adam and Eve. Bad work ! Clumsy god !

If the flood was local, that shows that the god of the OT is a local god, having nothing to do with the Inuits, the Europeans, the native Americans, the native Australians, or the Africans. Sorry for those I missed...