Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
OK. I hear you. But why the designation "hyper-literally". Is is not just plain "literal"? You have just posted two postings with your thoughts. May i assign them to allegory and say that you have not meant what you say?

While you decide on that, where shall all the water of the oceans go on the New Earth (Rev.21:1)? Or has God made another mathematical miscalculation which He cannot cope with?
A "new creation" means, to me, not a re-creation of the universe, but rather, a "reform," or "regeneration," of the universe. I believe God when He said that He made the universe "in the beginning," and finished his work by the 6th day. A "new" heavens, and a "new" earth, can refer to something "renewed."

I refer to your interpretation as "hyper-literal" because that is exactly how I see it from my perspective. The literal understanding would be understood as that contemporary culture would understand it, since it was written *in their culture.* They would not be speaking in astronomical terms. No, their sense of universality would have to do with experience--their experience in particular. Everything within the realm of their immediate experience would indicate "everything." Outside of their own personal experience are other things.

If I looked up into the sky and saw a huge black cloud, I would run for cover. And as the rain poured down, I would express that "everything under the sky is flooding." That doesn't refer to the *globe* of the earth, but only my own personal experience.

To be "hyper-literal" and "dogmatic" is to then require that my comments actually mean that the entire globe has to be saturated with water. It is putting words in my mouth, or interpreting those words in a way I didn't actually mean. Hence, your view to me is "hyper-literal."

Quote Originally Posted by Walls
Consider this. In Genesis 1:2 the earth was covered with water. God dispensed with the water by creating a canopy of water above the earth and the sea below. In Genesis 7 NOTHING NEW was needed. The Greenhouse Canopy crashed to earth in rain and the sea was stirred up beyond its God given boundaries. Has He not set the quantity and boundaries of the sea? Proverbs 8:23-29 says;

23 "I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:
26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.
27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:
29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth
:"


You see brother, in one breath you and Ram admit to God's ability and omnipotence, but in the next you say it was not logistically possible to cover the earth.
WRONG! That is the exact opposite of what Ram wrote! He said there is no question about what God *could* do. But in light of the Scriptures providing a naturalistic explanation for the Flood, we must assume that this Flood had naturalistic causes, and did not require a "stupendous miracle."

Quote Originally Posted by Walls
But God said in plain language that He did cover the earth with water, and goes further to say that He has set boundaries for the water. On the New Earth God has three possibilities as the Omnipotent.
  1. He can again form a canopy of all water which would give the earth a very clement climate - a Greenhouse effect
  2. He can transport the water away from the planet - a veritable "drop" in the vastness of the universe
  3. He can make it disappear. He made all the matter in the universe out of nothing. Can He not reverse it?

God does not deign to tell us. But that which He does tell us, let us believe it unless He obviously means a picture or Parable. Come, let us agree that OUR GOD IS ABLE TO DO WHAT HE SAYS - and it is our job to BELIEVE Him - not find a reason why it was not possible.
Again, Ram did *not* say God is incapable of stupendous miracles. It is a question of interpretation, in the context of that culture. People at that time saw the heaven above and the earth below. The waters below were seas, lakes, and rivers. The waters above were the clouds, or fog. Stating the fact that God created this has nothing to do with the subject at hand, and I'm not clear why you even mention it?

Since God's word says He finished with creating the universe after the 6th day, it doesn't seem logical that God is saying that He created 8 times the amount of water on earth in order to satisfy your need to interpret the Flood hyper-literally! It is way easier to understand all of the data with a local flood.

That region has evidence of a great flood in this time period. In other parts of the world, there are creatures and habitat that have never been disturbed by a universal Flood.

It makes much more sense to see God use the Flood story as an example for the human race as to what God intends for Man after the Fall. If there is not repentance, judgment will follow. And as the world gets worse, and rejects God's offer of clemency, universal judgment will come.

I believe God took Noah and the creatures in his immediate environment and saved them to show the whole world that He had no intention of destroying man or the creatures on earth. On the other hand, rejecting and opposing God will result in severe judgment and death.