Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Religious Issues' started by Lone Wolf8634, Jun 29, 2017.
I don't do homework, so I did not watch the video. But there is a strong argument that the flood recounted in the Bible was regional rather than global. The OT writers repeatedly employed phraseology like "the whole world" as hyperbolic rather than literal. For example, we read that the whole world wanted an audience with Solomon. (1 Kings 10:24). But it is clear from the context that this should not be hyper-literalistic, but rather read in the context in which it was intended. That is, no one supposes that aboriginal natives from Australia and Eskimos were paddling their canoes to seek an audience with Solomon. Rather, the context tells us that everyone who knew of Soloman wanted to meet him. Similarly, we read in the New Testament that Paul was stirring up riots "all over the world". (Acts 24:5). Again, though, the context makes clear that Paul's message was meeting strong opposition from Jews wherever he went, not that Japanese or Peruvians were rioting.
So, because words and phrases are equivocal rather than univocal (that is, they take on the meaning that the context allows rather than always having only one meaning), and because we read throughout the Bible that "the whole world" communicates regional rather than global scope, one may reasonably conclude that the flood was regional rather than global.