Tiburon
Member
Obviously? Why obviously? Is any mention made of the river?Obviously it was measured from the normal river height before it flooded.
Obviously? Why obviously? Is any mention made of the river?Obviously it was measured from the normal river height before it flooded.
If the story is based on an actual event, then that is the only feasible explanation, given that the KJV says that the flood was 15 cubits high and drained away like any other similar flood before and since.Obviously? Why obviously? Is any mention made of the river?
You're reading into the story details that are not there. The flood being 15 cubits above the mountain tops is just as feasible. Especially since we are talking about a story which has a very loose relationship with reality.If the story is based on an actual event, then that is the only feasible explanation, given that the KJV says that the flood was 15 cubits high and drained away like any other similar flood before and since.
Doesn't change the fact that the KJV clearly says that the flood height was 15 cubits, and DOES NOT say that the highest hills or mountains were covered by 15 cubits.You're reading into the story details that are not there. The flood being 15 cubits above the mountain tops is just as feasible. Especially since we are talking about a story which has a very loose relationship with reality.
I assume it was uniformly 15 cubits deep, whether on a hill on in a valley. That is what the Bible says. Perfect for water skiing.And where was this height measured from? Sea level? The tops of the mountains? The original position of the ark?
GenesisDoesn't change the fact that the KJV clearly says that the flood height was 15 cubits, and DOES NOT say that the highest hills or mountains were covered by 15 cubits.
Since the bible clearly says that the flood was 15 cubits high, then the highest hills/mountains in the flooded area were therefore less than 15 cubits higher than the normal water level, given that it clearly doesn't say that the flood covered the highest hills by 15 cubits.Genesis
19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
So either the waters prevailed 15 cubits above the mountains or the highest mountain was less that 15 cubits high.
Where are you getting this 'normal water level' from. If you want to be pedantic then the Bible makes no mention of 'normal water level'.Since the bible clearly says that the flood was 15 cubits high, then the highest hills/mountains in the flooded area were therefore less than 15 cubits higher than the normal water level, given that it clearly doesn't say that the flood covered the highest hills by 15 cubits.
Presumably the author of the story measured the level of the water with a river height gauge as shown in the photo of various flood heights of a nearby river. Or perhaps he/she simply marked the height of the flood on a nearby tree.Where are you getting this 'normal water level' from. If you want to be pedantic then the Bible makes no mention of 'normal water level'.
Presumably! That is the point. you are presuming a lot of things that are not in evidence.Presumably the author of the story measured the level of the water with a river height gauge as shown in the photo of various flood heights of a nearby river. Or perhaps he/she simply marked the height of the flood on a nearby tree.
So how else would the author have measured the flood height?Presumably! That is the point. you are presuming a lot of things that are not in evidence.
Yes. Likely copied from the Epic of Gilgamesh.So how else would the author have measured the flood height?
And what relevance is it to the fact that the KJV and Hebrew bible clearly say that the flood height was 15 cubits?
Or do you just want to be pedantic?
Or is that story just an imaginative fantasy?
So how else would the author have measured the flood height?
And what relevance is it to the fact that the KJV and Hebrew bible clearly say that the flood height was 15 cubits?
Or do you just want to be pedantic?
Or is that story just an imaginative fantasy?
So how high was the highest hill/mountain which was covered by the flood which was 15 cubits deep and drowned most of Noah's family and their animals but had no effect on a nearby olive tree, nor on two of Noah's brothers and their families (Gen 4:20-21)?No such thing as a mountain 15 cubits high or 24ft.
I don't disagree with that. I'm only pointing out that the biblical story only describes a local event and not a global event.All these concepts are very relative, because in the times described in the Bible, there were very relative measures. And the Bible was not written by the scientists of those times, since the Bible does not describe any scientific research of those times, any attempt to comprehend the nature of things. I am inclined to believe that initially the Bible was generally passed down orally from generation to generation and underwent changes, because each storyteller added something of his own to it. As a result, we have not so much a historical document as a collection of mythical stories.