3 ms·
I suppose we bring some of our own theology to bear on 'eretz'. If you believe that after the flood only 6 persons remained alive on the earth, then that sugges
by pmdulaney 5y ago
I suppose we bring some of our own theology to bear on 'eretz'. If you believe that after the flood only 6 persons remained alive on the earth, then that suggests that the flood was global.
- timbit42 5y agoSix? Don't you mean eight? No, I don't believe all humans were killed by the flood. There are no reasons to think it was. There are at least 5 other copies of Noah's flood story: Gilgamesh, Atrahasis, Ziusudra, Berossus, and Moses of Khoren, some of which are older than Genesis and were direct or indirect sources for Genesis, and none of them are global floods. I'd suggest reading the other sources. They are obviously the same story but the differences are interesting. Regardless, eretz definitely doesn't mean planet. If you are interested, I'd recommend Robert M. Best's book Noah's Ark and the Ziusudra Epic.
- pmdulaney 5y agoThanks for engaging with me. I had heard of Gilgamesh, but not the others. And I suppose you're right about the six vs eight -- I don't have a Bible with me. I realize that my views could be viewed as fideist and anti-intellectual. On the other hand, it would be a shame if great learning were to keep someone from accepting the simple truth of the Gospel. Or am I extrapolating too far to think that someone who rejects a world-wide Noahic flood also rejects the literal bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ?