question about Genesis 7:20

[Candlepower]

According to Woodward these civilizations add up to a combined total of people that could not have developed in 222 years from a base of 8 people

Steve,

Does Woodward provide precise population figures for those civilizations, and where did he get them?

Candlepower

[steve7150]

Steve,

Does Woodward provide precise population figures for those civilizations, and where did he get them?




Candle,
Woodward did not provide precise population figures , he got his estimates from the descriptions in the bible which uses phrases like tribes and kingdoms and civilizations living under a Pharoah to mean in total a lot of people to develop from 8 folks from the Ark in 222 years.In addition to these people who Woodward described as living in Canaan,Damascus and Egypt, in Gen 11.8 it says the Lord dispersed men over the face of all the earth which sounds like there were other civilizations although there are no precise population figures.

[Candlepower]

Woodward did not provide precise population figures

That's what I suspected. In the absence of dependable census records, I find Woodward's estimates for the earth's population 220 years after The Flood to be pure speculation. That is flimsy lumber to build with. He seems to be imposing on the antediluvian world his unverifiable calculations and his modern frame of reference.

...in Gen 11.8 it says the Lord dispersed men over the face of all the earth...

This verse provides good support for a global flood. Woodward thinks the flood was local, not global, therefore he must think that the global human race, except for Noah and his family, was not exterminated by The Flood. If Woodward is correct, then why the Genesis 11:8 dispersement? What would be the purpose of dispersing people all the world when there were already people living all over the world?

Here, I believe, is why God caused the dispersement of the people mentioned in Genesis 11:8

1. They were the only people on the globe. The flood had killed everyone else.

2. In Genesis 9:7, God essentially reaffirmed to Noah the mandate He had given to Adam (be fruitful & exercise dominion over the earth).

3. The people of Genesis 11:8 had multiplied, but they had not obeyed God's mandate to exercise dominion over the earth. Instead, they chose to remain in a fairly localized region of the world and to build a civilization where they were. They retained one language, and the Tower of Babel was the epicenter of their civilization (Gen. 11:4).

4. God was displeased with their refusal to spread into all the world and re-populate it (Gen. 11:5-9).

5. The mechanism God used to force the people to move out over the entire world was to confused their language (Genesis 11:7,8). The multiplicity of languages caused a sudden unity among the members of each group that happened to speak some new language, but disunity among the various language groups. The effect was dispersement as each group (because of the language differences) sought to move away from the others.

6. Genesis 11:1-9 helps explain not only why there are different languages, but also how the earth was re-populated after it had been de-populated by The Flood.

7. If The Flood was local, and if only those in the flood area were exterminated (except for Noah & family), then the following two things seem highly probable. First, there were people still living in areas of the globe that had not been effected by The Flood. Second their languages were different. If that was so, then why was God eager for the people in verse 8 to spread out, and why did He confuse their language? The best explanation seems to be that God wanted His de-populated earth to be re-populated.

Genesis 11:8 seems to provide a very strong clue that The Flood was global, not local.

God bless you brother,

Candlepower

[steve7150]

7. If The Flood was local, and if only those in the flood area were exterminated (except for Noah & family), then the following two things seem highly probable. First, there were people still living in areas of the globe that had not been effected by The Flood. Second their languages were different. If that was so, then why was God eager for the people in verse 8 to spread out, and why did He confuse their language? The best explanation seems to be that God wanted His de-populated earth to be re-populated.

Genesis 11:8 seems to provide a very strong clue that The Flood was global, not local.




I guess Candle as they say in the secular world , this is what makes a horserace. Firstly though Woodward can't provide precise population figures i think the words the bible uses like kingdoms suggest significant numbers. Secondly the Gen 11 does'nt say anything about re-populating the world , simply that men were dispersed all over the earth. In fact this would be the place to mention something about re-populating the earth due to the flood, therefore it appears most of the earth was never populated at all up this time.
Maybe the flood was both regional and global in the sense of that the global population had never dispersed very far from Mesopotania and the Middle East and God gave them some extra motivation to become a global population.

[Candlepower]

Steve,

I'm going to drop this thread now, but not because you've convinced me that the Local Flood position is correct. In fact, though I knew little about the arguments for a Local Flood prior to this discussion, Woodward/Woodrow's arguments to support it seem particularly contrived and forced. It's like he's trying to fit a barrel of water into a thimble. It just doesn't fit. His speculations have diminished what thought I had that a Local Flood might be true.

In spite of Woodward/Woodrow, I haven't rejected the possibility of a Local Flood. But (for me) it is a less-possible scenario than a global flood. You and I and Woodward are asserting some things we can't possibly know for sure to be true. We are creating new speculations and loading them atop old ones. Our speculations are running amok, brother.

When a person chooses one explanation to be true over others, he tends to see everything (even things that clearly argue against his explanation) as supporting his chosen explanation. He develops blind spots. Reason and logic take a beating, and defending ones position becomes more important than finding the truth. I'm not accusing you of this particularly, I'm just saying that this is a problem common to all of us. Our pride gets in the way of finding truth. This is something we all need to be aware of and to fight against.

Suffice it to say, you and I are presently comfortable in different camps within the family of God.

By the way, I've asked you twice if you have listened to http://www.thenarrowpath.com/mp3s/bible ... /gen07.mp3
Have you? It is definitely worth the time, and I highly recommend it.

Thank you for discussing this topic with me. God bless you.

Candlepower

[steve7150]

By the way, I've asked you twice if you have listened to http://www.thenarrowpath.com/mp3s/bible ... /gen07.mp3
Have you? It is definitely worth the time, and I highly recommend it.

Thank you for discussing this topic with me. God bless you.






Candle,
I did listen to it and it was very good, nice talking to you.

[Paidion]

I have skimmed the posts here as I don't have a compelling interest in various views of the flood. But I have been looking to see whether my question concerning local flood theorists had been answered, but it seems it has not even been asked.

If the flood were local, how could it cover the mountain tops (regardless of their height)? Long before the mountain tops could be covered, would the water not quickly recede in all directions?
(Water runs to the lowest areas)

If areas in all directions were flooded so that the water could rise to the height of the highest mountain, then the flood wouldn't have been "local", would it?

[backwoodsman]

Maybe the flood was both regional and global in the sense of that the global population had never dispersed very far from Mesopotania and the Middle East and God gave them some extra motivation to become a global population.

That's essentially the view of Hugh Ross and his associates, backed up by both science (they are, after all, scientists) and solid Biblical exegesis. They have an article on the subject at:

• http://www.reasons.org/astronomy/noahs- ... -article-1

http://www.reasons.org/astronomy/noahs- ... -article-1

If the flood were local, how could it cover the mountain tops (regardless of their height)? Long before the mountain tops could be covered, would the water not quickly recede in all directions?

The above article answers this question.