Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Do You Believe There Was Not Rain Before The Flood Of Noah?


  

31 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you believe there was no rain before the Flood of Noah?

    • Yes
      22
    • No
      9


Recommended Posts

  • Moderators

Don't have enough infor from the Bible to make a certain stand. I agree there wasn't rain before Gen 2:5, but there was also, at that point, according to contex, 'no man' either, so no rain before man. After man? Not sure. Clearly the Lord could have continued watering by a mist from the ground until the flood came, but it doesn't say specifically so. I'd speculate "no rain before the flood", but no more than speculate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You can see through ice, especially if God wants you too.  The verse that comes to mind said something about separating the waters from the waters and putting a firmament between them.

the firmament is not an ice shield it is what hold the darkness and separates us from God and his abode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Seems pretty plain to me.  Why you ask?  because God said it.

 

Ge 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
 6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

 

(Emphasis Mine)

 

So you either believe the account that God gave us by His inspired word, or you don't and need to inject your own human reasoning. I do believe that the Biblical chronology would prove that Gen.2:5 was before the flood.  eh???

in context is does say, and there was not a man to till the ground.  but after there was a man to till the ground then it is only logical that it rained.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

in context is does say, and there was not a man to till the ground.  but after there was a man to till the ground then it is only logical that it rained.

 

Um... why? There's a whole lot of land that doesn't get tilled in the world, but it still needs water. It's only planted crops that require tilling.

Contextually, the verse says that the Lord 'had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground." I think this is just two unrelated factual statements. If the first was because of the second, then grammatically the conjunctive 'for' should have been used. As it was not, I don't think we can pull a doctrine out of this verse that is (a) not mentioned and would (B) require a complete reorganization of the hydrological cycle (which would be a significant natural event that is also not mentioned).  

I didn't have a clear opinion before as to whether or not it rained before the flood, but now that I think about the physical ramifications of such a hydrological change, I think I am now of the opinion that, as far as we are told, it must not have rained before the flood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

the firmament is not an ice shield it is what hold the darkness and separates us from God and his abode.

Wrong.  Genesis 1:6 tells us what the firmament was for:  And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Um... why? There's a whole lot of land that doesn't get tilled in the world, but it still needs water. It's only planted crops that require tilling.

Contextually, the verse says that the Lord 'had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground." I think this is just two unrelated factual statements. If the first was because of the second, then grammatically the conjunctive 'for' should have been used. As it was not, I don't think we can pull a doctrine out of this verse that is (a) not mentioned and would ( B) require a complete reorganization of the hydrological cycle (which would be a significant natural event that is also not mentioned).  

I didn't have a clear opinion before as to whether or not it rained before the flood, but now that I think about the physical ramifications of such a hydrological change, I think I am now of the opinion that, as far as we are told, it must not have rained before the flood. 

you will notice that the word man is singular.  a single man could not OBviously till the whole eartth, but he could till the earth locally.  Remember that earth as a planet is not the same as earth the ground which is what God is talking about.  what we have here is God telling us that until he made a man to till the earth the earth was misted that is all it says.  Once man was created and began to multiply then God allowed it to rain.  We know that Adam, Cain and others since them have tilled the earth before the flood.

 

Rain was not unusual for them but raining for 40 days straight was, and it would be today. I don't think God would have revealed this scripture for us to assume there was no rain for almost 1000 years until the flood.

Edited by AVBibleBeliever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Agreed.  The only thing that would lead me to make an "assumption" of rain before the flood would be the presence of "Rivers" such as the river leading from Eden.  I find it difficult to picture a river so large it splits into 4 head ways, forming from merely ground mist.  How would ground mist create such a great runoff of water?  I can allow though for the possibility of the waters source for the river coming from "the fountains of the deep" which were also mentioned as being "broken up" during the flood.  This could allow rivers formed from underground water sources and not rain.  

 

This issue is a tug of war for me, it is very slippery.  Every time I think I have my opinion nailed down on one side or the other, it slips between my fingers to the other side. 

 

However, I am very cautious about forming doctrines over things NOT mentioned in the Bible.  I have seen a few, even on OB, who take strong doctrinal stands not on that the bible says, but what it does not say.

 

Bro. Garry

Edited by 2bLikeJesus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Genesis 7:4 is part of a quote from a conversation God has directly with Noah, in which God explains His plan to flood the earth. The fact that God talks about rain without explaining what it is implies that at this point Noah already knows. But there are plenty of explanations I can think of:
 
  • Noah knew what rain was because he had seen it before.
  • Noah knew what rain was because God had explained it, but that conversation isn't recorded.
  • Noah knew what rain was because God had granted him some sort of intrinsic knowledge of it.
Or even:
  • Noah didn't know what rain was but figured it out from the context (i.e. being asked to build a boat for an impending flood).
  • Noah didn't know what rain was and remained ignorant until the day it began to rain.
If Noah didn't know what rain was, it begs the question whether or not he made the roof and upper deck rainproof. God tells Noah to use pitch inside and out, but you might make a roof with pitch and yet have holes in it if you don't think water will come from above. :-)
 
Yet another explanation is that Noah knew what rain was because at some point prior he had visited Scotland... ;-)
Edited by Alimantado
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Since my opinion is just that, my opinion, I do believe it rained before the flood of Noah's time.

I base my 'opinion' upon this...

 

Since Genesis 2:5 said there wasn't a man to till the earth yet, God hadn't caused a rain to occur up to that point in time.

Yet after Adam and his wife were expelled out of the Garden, it is said in Genesis 3:23, that the Lord sent man forth, from

the garden to till the earth from whence he was taken.

 

Then there was a 'man to till the earth', and a reason to let it rain.

 

That is how I perceive this subject. I may be 'off me noggin', but it is me noggin' to be off with.

 

(Edited to reword as per Bro. Jims post)

Edited by Genevanpreacher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Um... why? There's a whole lot of land that doesn't get tilled in the world, but it still needs water. It's only planted crops that require tilling.

Contextually, the verse says that the Lord 'had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground." I think this is just two unrelated factual statements. If the first was because of the second, then grammatically the conjunctive 'for' should have been used. As it was not, I don't think we can pull a doctrine out of this verse that is (a) not mentioned and would ( B) require a complete reorganization of the hydrological cycle (which would be a significant natural event that is also not mentioned).  

I didn't have a clear opinion before as to whether or not it rained before the flood, but now that I think about the physical ramifications of such a hydrological change, I think I am now of the opinion that, as far as we are told, it must not have rained before the flood. 

 

Since my Bible says the word "neither" where yours says "and", my view is OBviously different. (as well as the 1537 Coverdale/Tyndale Bible)

 

As for the phrase "significant natural event" (hydrological cycle) you are discussing in your post above, wouldn't it be a more significant event to change what was natural already?

Putting aside the 'theory' of a 'humid type of atmosphere' where our earth was enveloped in a vast solid mass of water, giving us unrealistic environmental conditions, 

I believe the waters that are described in Gen. 1 verses 6-8 are referring to the clouds that hold the rains, agreeing with Gen. 6 verse 11 where the 'windows of heaven

were opened'.

 

Now this is my opinion, and I have only proof shown above, I defer to anyone else's opinions with respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

GP  You added the word "since." which is not in that scripture. This would change the meaning and give the reason for there being no rain as because there was not a man to till the ground.

 

If you back up just a little you will see that this section of scripture is a recount of happenings in His creation.  Ge 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

 

Plants and herbs were created but did not actually grow in the ground. But again, this was not because there was no man to till them, it was because it had not rained.  Ge 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew:

 

Anyway, just something to think about.

Edited by Jim_Alaska
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...