A pastor recently preached a sermon on Noah's Ark. And he brought up the point that although the story tells of the "entire world" being flooded, perhaps it was really just one small area.
The reason is that people verbally passed down the flood story. And there was no Internet or TV back then, so to people living in, say, a large valley... a flood in that valley would seem like the whole world to them.
So what are your thoughts on this viewpoint?
2007-03-12 11:58:46 · 10 answers · asked by Rapunzel XVIII 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The pastor is right. "The entire world" is a subjective measurement.
2007-03-12 12:04:08 · answer #1 · answered by slippped 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The flood probably covered a much larger portion of the earth than just a valley somewhere. As to whether it covered the entire earth or not can be a subject for debate. It is believed that there currently is not enough water on the earth in any form to cover the entire earth, even if both poles melted.
I do know that with God, all things are possible. Who knows what really happened. I do believe that there was a great flood and that it did wipe out all of civilization at that time. But whether it covered the whole earth, I guess that is a question to ask when we meet God.
2007-03-12 12:31:13 · answer #2 · answered by rbarc 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Was your pastor also more reasonable about the animals (only local farm animals on the ark), or did he still claim that Noah took elephants, giraffes, bison, polar bears, and penguins?
An ancient person surviving a local flood with a boatload of farm animals is possible. Noah floating over Everest with 2 of every species is not.
2007-03-12 12:15:00 · answer #3 · answered by scifiguy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here's a thought; Did you know that other religions (Hindu, Indians, Babylonians,etc..) have recorded this flood, and in each story, they mention the whole earth. Now the "Whole" earth, was populated in that area. (For I cannot find any American culture that dates back B.C.) So, in truth, it was the whole earth according to man.
2007-03-12 12:17:54 · answer #4 · answered by Da Mick 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
That's not a new idea. A lot of people think that if that story had any truth behind it, this would be the reasonable explanation for it.
2007-03-12 12:03:00 · answer #5 · answered by KS 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
im sorry
but when i was young i loved the cartoon and the story of noah ark
but i was wondering if u care to chat
email me peterfl999@yahoo.com
2007-03-13 08:07:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't believe it actually happened. I think it is symbolic for baptism. When one is baptized, they are "cleansed" of their sins after they have accepted Christ. The flood cleansed and purified the Earth.
2007-03-12 12:09:26 · answer #7 · answered by Jay 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i think your pastor shouldnt try to get rich off tithes, he has no confrimation of his little belief. the bible is the only proof we have, whats his?
so you mean to tell me that for 40 days and 40 nights, Noah was circling an area? doesnt make sense
2007-03-12 12:05:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
That is a good explanation.....but I think scientist have proven a great flood did occur...I don't remember if it spanned the globe or just Africa/Middle East...
2007-03-12 12:02:08 · answer #9 · answered by Greenwood 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Tigris/Euphrates flooding. Not "global."
2007-03-12 12:01:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋