Tag Info

New answers tagged

5

One prominent adherent to the idea of a local flood, Hugh Ross, has maintained that the flood of Noah wiped out all of humanity. "In both its linguistic and historical context, world in the Genesis passages refers not to the entire planet but rather to the “world” of people. So the Flood could have been worldwide without being global." Ross goes on to ...


5

Local-flood proponents generally fall into one of two camps: That the narrative is told from the point of view of the author, and from the author's point of view, the flood covered the entire (known) earth. (One example). In this view, I believe the only logical explanation for your question would be that God's promise was taken to mean that this would ...


1

Noah was not tasked with taking every single species on the whole planet. If you look at the animals that were taken in Genesis 6, they are all vertebrates. Vertebrates only compose about 3% of all the animal species in the world. http://animals.about.com/od/zoologybasics/a/howmanyspecies.htm Of this 3%, there were NO water dwelling species taken. Of that ...


0

Genesis 2:5-6 indeed indicates that at one stage of the Earth's creation it did not rain, but instead it was watered from underground springs: Genesis 2:5 - "No shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, (6) but streams came up from the earth ...



Top 50 recent answers are included