Was Noah's Flood 15 cubits above the mountains, or just 15 cubits & above the hills?

[MrsLurking]

Did Noah's Flood rise 15 cubits above the mountains? *OR* or did it rise 15 cubits AND the flood rose above the hills?



Bible translation TRADITIONS in English-speaking cultures assume that Noah's Flood exceeded the height of even Mt. Everest by 23 feet. But to sustain that water depth globally would require far more water than what exists on the entire planet. Is there any Biblical reason to assume such a vast height and quantity of water? [And considering that the ancient Hebrews had no concept of "planet earth" ---and therefore no vocabulary word for "global" and "entire planet" ---should a global flood be assumed when the Hebrew text only speaks of the entire ERETZ (i.e., "land", "region")? ]



For Genesis 7:20, the KJV says:

"Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered."

...but the New King James Bible says:

"The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered."


The New International Version shows in the main text:

"The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits."

....but the translation footnote provides the alternative:

"The waters rose more than fifteen cubits, and the mountains were covered."




Some translation footnotes and many commentaries point out that:

1) There is no word for "deep" in terms of water depth in Biblical Hebrew.

2) Genesis 7:20 simply states that the flood waters ROSE by 15 cubits.

3) The Hebrew word usually translated "mountains" in most English translations can just as easily mean "hills".


So, how deep was Noah's Flood?


HOW does the average English Bible reader resolve this question?


CAN the average English Bible reader resolve this question?

 

[Strathos]

Interestingly enough, I had a dream last night that I was debating the whole Earth/Eretz thing with someone...

 

[Steve Petersen]

Did Noah's Flood rise 15 cubits above the mountains? *OR* or did it rise 15 cubits AND the flood rose above the hills?



Bible translation TRADITIONS in English-speaking cultures assume that Noah's Flood exceeded the height of even Mt. Everest by 23 feet. But to sustain that water depth globally would require far more water than what exists on the entire planet. Is there any Biblical reason to assume such a vast height and quantity of water? [And considering that the ancient Hebrews had no concept of "planet earth" ---and therefore no vocabulary word for "global" and "entire planet" ---should a global flood be assumed when the Hebrew text only speaks of the entire ERETZ (i.e., "land", "region")? ]



For Genesis 7:20, the KJV says:

"Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered."

...but the New King James Bible says:

"The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered."


The New International Version shows in the main text:

"The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits."

....but the translation footnote provides the alternative:

"The waters rose more than fifteen cubits, and the mountains were covered."




Some translation footnotes and many commentaries point out that:

1) There is no word for "deep" in terms of water depth in Biblical Hebrew.

2) Genesis 7:20 simply states that the flood waters ROSE by 15 cubits.

3) The Hebrew word usually translated "mountains" in most English translations can just as easily mean "hills".


So, how deep was Noah's Flood?


HOW does the average English Bible reader resolve this question?


CAN the average English Bible reader resolve this question?

Are these the only options?

 

[super animator]

Mt. Everest

Does the flood needed to be that high to kill everything on this planet? I pretty much sure there isn't any animals living that high. (I could be wrong though).
The hill and the mountains could be anything. I don't know what the author meant when he says the hills/mountains.

 

[AV1611VET]

So, how deep was Noah's Flood?

5½ miles.

 

[NoPostDocFrock]

Are these the only options?

Good question. I believe it is one of the most important questions in all of hermeneutics.

Do you have any others to propose?

 

[NoPostDocFrock]

Originally Posted by MrsLurking
So, how deep was Noah's Flood?

5½ miles.

I'm surprised to see AV1611Vet so strongly disagreeing with the KJV Bible's translation!

 

[abysmul]

The purpose was to basically cleanse the earth, so mountains.

 

[MrsLurking]

The purpose was to basically cleanse the earth, so mountains.

Because it is in Hebrew, I'm prone ot say "HARIM" ----with only a little tongue in cheek, because when we decide between hill and mountain, we are making a distinction WHICH DID NOT EXIST IN THE MIND OF THE AUTHOR OF GENESIS!

And if Noah's land was the Tigris-Euphrates Valley, there ARE NOT MOUNTAINS in the area! Just hills.

 

[AV1611VET]

And if Noah's land was the Tigris-Euphrates Valley, there ARE NOT MOUNTAINS in the area! Just hills.

Unless my theory is correct: that Noah and his family lived in what is now New Jersey.

Surely you don't think the ark just bobbed up and down in the general area for a year, do you?

Either that, or you must think the Flood was just a local one.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The 'covering' or immersion of the whole earth with water was a symbolic (and I believe actual) baptism to remove sin. That said a large swell could have 'prevailed' over the highest peak and accomplished the task without 'standing' over that peak for any length of time. All that is necessary for a successful baptism is to be completely under water even for just a split second. By the time the highest peaks were covered "all in whose nostrils was the breath of life" were dead.

 

[AV1611VET]

The 'covering' or immersion of the whole earth with water was a symbolic (and I believe actual) baptism to remove sin. That said a large swell could have 'prevailed' over the highest peak and accomplished the task without 'standing' over that peak for any length of time. All that is necessary for a successful baptism is to be completely under water even for just a split second. By the time the highest peaks were covered "all in whose nostrils was the breath of life" were dead.

There are some who believe that baptism doesn't remove sin.

 

[JustMeSee]

There have always been floods. From the viewer, it can seem that the land/world is covered as far as you can see.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

There are some who believe that baptism doesn't remove sin.

The flood was actually two baptisms in one, much like the Red Sea; part water, part fire. God first separates the wheat from the chaff, then burns (or drowns) the chaff.

 

[MrsLurking]

The flood was actually two baptisms in one, much like the Red Sea; part water, part fire. God first separates the wheat from the chaff, then burns the chaff.

No fire was associated with Noah's Flood.

None.

 

[RickG]

Unless my theory is correct: that Noah and his family lived in what is now New Jersey.

Okay AV, humor me. Why New Jersey?

 

[AV1611VET]

Okay AV, humor me. Why New Jersey?

QV please:

Genesis 6:14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch.

The Pitch Pine is found mainly in the northeastern United States, from Maine and Ohio to Kentucky and northern Georgia. A few stands occur in southern Quebec and Ontario. This pine occupies a variety of habitats from dry, acidic sandy uplands to swampy lowlands, and can survive in very poor conditions; it is the primary tree of the New Jersey Pine Barrens.

These two references, in my opinion, give credence to my idea that Noah lived in the United States.

 

[RickG]

QV please:

Lebanon, Syria and Northern Israel used to be famous for their pines.

Wiki: In Western Asia, the Eastern Mediterranean conifer-sclerophyllous-broadleaf forests ecoregion in Turkey; and the Southern Anatolian montane conifer and deciduous forests ecoregion in Lebanon, Syria, and northern Israel.

You have an amazing imagination.

 

[AV1611VET]

Lebanon, Syria and Northern Israel used to be famous for their pines.

Wiki: In Western Asia, the Eastern Mediterranean conifer-sclerophyllous-broadleaf forests ecoregion in Turkey; and the Southern Anatolian montane conifer and deciduous forests ecoregion in Lebanon, Syria, and northern Israel.

You have an amazing imagination.

Why? because I don't go with Turkey, Anatolia, Lebanon, or Syria?

Would that be because you think the Flood was local, and to put Noah and his family [much] further east in Eden, would mean that the ark would have had to have done some traveling outside of your local jurisdiction?

You have an amazing imagination.

I have a feeling that anyone who believes Noah lived off of your radar screen would be 'amazingly imaginative.'

(Or maybe you're just choosey in who you analyze?)

In any event, where do you think Noah lived, Mr. Scientist?

I'll bet that, just by ... coincidence ... it's within your local [flood] radar, isn't it?

 

[RickG]

Why? because I don't go with Turkey, Anatolia, Lebanon, or Syria?

No, it is because you ignore the fact that there were plentiful pines from which to get pitch right there in Noah's back yard. He didn't come from New Jersey.

Would that be because you think the Flood was local, and to put Noah and his family [much] further east in Eden, would mean that the ark would have had to have done some traveling outside of your local jurisdiction?

No, because there is zero evidence for a global flood. Why should the flood story should be taken as literal?

In any event, where do you think Noah lived, Mr. Scientist?

In the biblical lands now known as the middle-east. Can you cite one theologian that believes Noah lived in New Jersey?