Is the story of Noah literal?

[Ronald Nolette]

then you know limestone isn't volcanic and no matter how hard you pretend no limestone formed on Mt' St Hellens in 1982.

and so? any limestone there was most likely depositions both during and after the flood and uncovered by that carving action of the water.

No it doesn't.

Yes it does. without close photos or actual physical research, you are just spinning tales

"I am simply telling you that we have an eyewitness report of the breakup of the super continent. But you would prefer the testimony of men who were no there and did not see it over those who were! Given the extreme violence of the initial geologic activity of the flood,I could give you valid theories based on modern observation as to how a conitnent would break up and that teh drift would be faster initiallyu and then as inertia waned, would slow down."

I said that and stand by that! but the continents split
.

1. Genesis 10:5
   By these were the isles of the Gentiles dividedin their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.
   In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
2. Genesis 10:25
   And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan.
   

   No it starts with observations like elemental decay rate of distant supernovas, the rate of decay is in perfect step with how far away that nova is. There are literally hundreds of ways such decay is verifiable and it would just take a moment on Google to start finding out about them

   Wrong again. Radio decay is measured by the throwing of or certain materials at certain times as it decays from its most unstable element to its most stable element. Supernovaes may alter the rate of decay but it not useful in the radioactive decay measuring used for dating.

But pray tell how is the ejection of radioactive material from a supernova millions or billions ofl ight years away effective

Reference?

Let me show you!

Radioactive Decay Rates May Not Be Constant After All

A number of technologies are predicated on the assumption that rates of radioactive decay are constant -- but what if they aren't?

www.forbes.com

Fluctuations Show Radioisotope Decay Is Unreliable

Radioactive isotopes are commonly portrayed as providing rock-solid evidence that the earth is billions of years old. Since such isotopes are thought to decay at consistent rates over time, the assumption is that simple measurements can lead to reliable ages. But new discoveries of rate...

www.icr.org

"Excess Argon": The "Archilles' Heel" of Potassium-Argon and Argon-Argon "Dating" of Volcanic Rocks

For more than three decades potassium-argon (K-Ar) and argon-argon (Ar-Ar) dating of rocks has been crucial in underpinning the billions of years for Earth history claimed by evolutionists. Critical to these dating methods is the assumption that there was no radiogenic argon (40Ar*) in the rocks...

www.icr.org

Radiometric Dating | The Institute for Creation Research

www.icr.org

there are many many more.

What has been found is a constant unbroken written record and no where did anyone ever mention anything about their civilization being destroyed by a flood. I really think they would have noticed.

As far as they know. Many time the supposed unbroken written record had to be adjusted with later finds. there are over 200 different flood accounts in the world today! The epic of gilgsmesh is the oldest next to Noahs account.

In medieval Europe the average woman did not marry until she was about 25 and had between 4 and 6 children. "Even through women may have conceived frequently, each pregnancy had no better than a 50% chance of going to term.” The mortality rate of those children was 50% by age 5. Ref: David Cressy Birth, Marriage, and Death in the Middle Ages Oxford University Press 1997

Western European marriage pattern - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Weddings in the middle ages formed the groundwork for most of the modern wedding customs and traditions. Noble women typically married when they got to the age of 24 or older, compared to peasants who married at a younger age of 12 years. Overall, in Europe most people married by the time they reached 19 years.

these say your lack of access site say you are wrong. Nobles married at 24 or later but peasants married as young as 12!

Your math is horrible 3x6=18 but only half of those would be giving birth to the next generation so the next generation would 9 women giving birth to 54 children and then 26 women giving birth to the following generation. After 10 generations (the bible states that there were 10 generations between Noah and Abraham - i'm surprised you don't know this) you would end up with 14,215 women ready to give birth to the next generation and an equal number of men so a total of people 28,400 people by the time of Abraham.

My bad so let us slice this down by the halfs. and look at ten generations (from the flood to Babel which was 400 years

3X6+18/2=9
9x6=54/2= 27
27x6=163/2= 81.5 (82)
82x6=492/2= 246
246X6= 1476/2=738
738X6=4428/2=2214
2214X6=13284/2=6642
6642X6=39852/2=19926
19926X6=119556/2 =59778
59778X6 = 358668

so assuming that 6 children were born to women in each of forty years (remember girls married at puberty) the last generation when Abraham was born would have given birth to 358668 kids. Now coupled witrh all alive still itr could have easily been 1,000,000 +. and remember the bible shows that most familes had more than 6 children. and as wares and massive plagues were unknown at these times survival would have been high. God also most likely had something to do with population growth, He is God after all.

Yeah- it's mathematically possible. If you decide an average generation is 30 years (probably a bit longer than reality), that's 200 generations. A population starting with 2 that doubles every 30 years for 6000 years is 2^200. We probably wouldn't all fit on the planet if it were that simple. If you introduce factors like disease, inbreeding, injury, famine, etc... it's much less clear. That said- the world population was about 3 billion in 1960 and was about 6 billion in 2000, and you only need 33 generations to get to 8.6 billion by simple doubling.

Billions of People in Thousands of Years?

Creationists are often asked, “How is it possible for the earth’s population to reach billions of people if the world is only about 6,000 years old and if there were just two humans in the beginning?”

answersingenesis.org

 

[RLT63]

and so? any limestone there was most likely depositions both during and after the flood and uncovered by that carving action of the water.

Yes it does. without close photos or actual physical research, you are just spinning tales

I said that and stand by that! but the continents split
.

1. Genesis 10:5
   By these were the isles of the Gentiles dividedin their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.
   In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
2. Genesis 10:25
   And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan.
   
   Wrong again. Radio decay is measured by the throwing of or certain materials at certain times as it decays from its most unstable element to its most stable element. Supernovaes may alter the rate of decay but it not useful in the radioactive decay measuring used for dating.

But pray tell how is the ejection of radioactive material from a supernova millions or billions ofl ight years away effective

Let me show you!

Radioactive Decay Rates May Not Be Constant After All

A number of technologies are predicated on the assumption that rates of radioactive decay are constant -- but what if they aren't?

www.forbes.com

Fluctuations Show Radioisotope Decay Is Unreliable

Radioactive isotopes are commonly portrayed as providing rock-solid evidence that the earth is billions of years old. Since such isotopes are thought to decay at consistent rates over time, the assumption is that simple measurements can lead to reliable ages. But new discoveries of rate...

www.icr.org

"Excess Argon": The "Archilles' Heel" of Potassium-Argon and Argon-Argon "Dating" of Volcanic Rocks

For more than three decades potassium-argon (K-Ar) and argon-argon (Ar-Ar) dating of rocks has been crucial in underpinning the billions of years for Earth history claimed by evolutionists. Critical to these dating methods is the assumption that there was no radiogenic argon (40Ar*) in the rocks...

www.icr.org

Radiometric Dating | The Institute for Creation Research

www.icr.org

there are many many more.

As far as they know. Many time the supposed unbroken written record had to be adjusted with later finds. there are over 200 different flood accounts in the world today! The epic of gilgsmesh is the oldest next to Noahs account.

Western European marriage pattern - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Weddings in the middle ages formed the groundwork for most of the modern wedding customs and traditions. Noble women typically married when they got to the age of 24 or older, compared to peasants who married at a younger age of 12 years. Overall, in Europe most people married by the time they reached 19 years.

these say your lack of access site say you are wrong. Nobles married at 24 or later but peasants married as young as 12!

My bad so let us slice this down by the halfs. and look at ten generations (from the flood to Babel which was 400 years

3X6+18/2=9
9x6=54/2= 27
27x6=163/2= 81.5 (82)
82x6=492/2= 246
246X6= 1476/2=738
738X6=4428/2=2214
2214X6=13284/2=6642
6642X6=39852/2=19926
19926X6=119556/2 =59778
59778X6 = 358668

so assuming that 6 children were born to women in each of forty years (remember girls married at puberty) the last generation when Abraham was born would have given birth to 358668 kids. Now coupled witrh all alive still itr could have easily been 1,000,000 +. and remember the bible shows that most familes had more than 6 children. and as wares and massive plagues were unknown at these times survival would have been high. God also most likely had something to do with population growth, He is God after all.

Yeah- it's mathematically possible. If you decide an average generation is 30 years (probably a bit longer than reality), that's 200 generations. A population starting with 2 that doubles every 30 years for 6000 years is 2^200. We probably wouldn't all fit on the planet if it were that simple. If you introduce factors like disease, inbreeding, injury, famine, etc... it's much less clear. That said- the world population was about 3 billion in 1960 and was about 6 billion in 2000, and you only need 33 generations to get to 8.6 billion by simple doubling.

Billions of People in Thousands of Years?

Creationists are often asked, “How is it possible for the earth’s population to reach billions of people if the world is only about 6,000 years old and if there were just two humans in the beginning?”

answersingenesis.org

Informative

 

[Taken]

@RLT 63

Noah’s account literal? Yes

My summation…in brief elementary terms;
* Dry Land…God called Earth.
* Earth…in the beginning One Mass.
* Seeds scattered on Earth…
* Man created & made…
* Man put in Garden…
* Woman companion out from man…
* Man & woman given necessary provisions
* Man & woman given ONE forbation and negative consequence IF they should choose to partake of the forbidden tree.
* Man & woman partook of forbidden tree.
* Man & woman escorted out of garden.
* Man & woman thereafter to multiply AND negative consequence…BODILY DEATH…appointed to Man & woman and all generational offspring of every Man & woman thereafter born.
* Animals…present…categorized…as KINDS…
Clean/Unclean…Land/Sea…Live offspring/egg offspring…Fly, walk, crawl, swim, large groups/ colonies, herds, single/small groups/ etc.
* ManKIND…settles, multiples, plants, crops, tends, food, housing.
* Animals roam long distances, multiple, adapt, to shelter, food & water sources, weather.

*** Approx. 100 years AFTER Flood…LAND MASS begins (fault lines /cracks/ in earth … (possibly caused during Great Flood effects);
Begin widening separating LAND Mass…
dividing Dry Land from Dry Land via the force of Water (Seas).

*** The Animals…adapting…to weather, Hot, cold, wet, dry, food supply, companionship, mating, multiplying, and land mass separating.

(And noting plants as well, adapting, IN dirt, IN the seas.)

*** Fact is…ManKIND and AnimalKIND and PlantKIND…are still from the Beginning the SAME KIND of things….
AND YET…VERY DIVERSE in their appearance, in their behaviors, in their food sources, cultures, likes, dislikes, languages, beliefs, adaptations to their natural habitats (weather, temperatures, shelters, etc.)

*** Fact is…ManKIND, AnimalKIND, PlantKIND regardless of their ability to ADAPT, appearances change, behaviors change, locations change…
ManKIND will always be ManKIND, AnimalKIND will always be AnimalKIND and PlantKIND will always be PlantKIND.

Remember…God, By His Design, His Power and His Authority….from the Beginning….
Revealed HIS DIVISIONS.

And By Gods Design, His Power and His Authority and His Offering…SHALL there Be a FINAL Separation OF all things Divided.

ManKIND has the unique opportunity via Gods Offering, to decide WHICH SIDE of the
FINAL Separation THEY willingly (according to Gods Order and Way) choose to STAND…..WITH or WITHOUT God.


Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Scott Downey]

Genesis 9, So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.

And they have with the blessing of God. They have dominion over all the other earth creatures.
God setup the circumstances, again after the flood, for man to increase greatly in numbers and fill the earth.
With the ultimate purpose of eternal salvation and reconciliation, and a new earth and heaven at the end of this world.


2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand.

 

[Oldsoul]

Whether or not the story is to be taken literally could be, and likely will be, debated until the end of days. That, in my humble opinion, is not the point. The point is that God can, and has, destroyed all that He deemed unworthy.

The power of God has NO limits, and HIS will, SHALL be done. This story serves as a testament to this fact. So, debate if you must, the FACT remains that if we were to have definitive proof, we would have it. Instead, we are commanded to have FAITH.

 

[Wick Stick]

Is the flood of Genesis story literal? I have always thought that it was because Jesus referred to the days of Noah and AIG and YECs do a good job of presenting it as literal, what do y’all think? Are Noah’s ark and flood literal scientific facts? « SMR blog

1. A large percentage of the world’s fauna, including, for example, dodos, sloths, penguins, kangaroos, koalas and many other species, are not native to the Middle East (assuming that was the location of Noah’s ark). How did they travel there to board the ark?
2. Island species are particularly vulnerable to predators — when predators have been introduced to an island, they often drive indigenous species to extinction (as has happened in Australia, Hawaii, the Galapagos and numerous other islands). Thus such species would not have been able to survive in the Middle East, away from their naturally protected habitats.
3. The total mass of on-board animals would have been some 400,000 kg, if only yearlings were taken, or some 5 million kg, if adults were taken. Either figure is far more than could be accommodated in the ark as described in the Bible and reconstructed in Kentucky.
4. The figures in the previous item do not include food and water for a one-year sojourn, which would multiply the weight by at least 10 times if not more. Further, many animals require special diets — silkworms require mulberry leaves, Pandas require bamboo, and snakes, for example, require fresh food. How could fresh food be provided for a full year?
5. How could large numbers of animals be protected from the many on-board predators, such as lions and tigers?

Is there a threshold for literality?

I think there was a literal flood in the past that the Bible story is re-counting. But, stories that comes from pre-history... they aren't history... because there was NO history yet. So the story must belong to a different literary genre (epic poetry?)... and that genre doesn't require that every fact be recounted literally.

So, for instance, the time frames from Noah's flood story are precisely the time frames for the gestation and birth of a baby. That probably is on purpose... it's a poetic way of saying that the earth was re-born, rather than a literal re-counting of the exact number of days the earth was underwater.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Whether or not the story is to be taken literally could be, and likely will be, debated until the end of days. That, in my humble opinion, is not the point. The point is that God can, and has, destroyed all that He deemed unworthy.

The power of God has NO limits, and HIS will, SHALL be done. This story serves as a testament to this fact. So, debate if you must, the FACT remains that if we were to have definitive proof, we would have it. Instead, we are commanded to have FAITH.

Well we do have hard empirical science that points to a global flood. But this also will be debated. People do not like to accept that God is capable of speaking the universe into existence in 6 days, destroy the old world with a giant flood nor even raising a body from teh dead that had been drained of its blood!

 

[Scott Downey]

yea, God can do it all, anything at all if He wishes and wills it to occur. He also does everything He does according to the counsel of His own will, meaning He does not take input from created things to change His mind about what He will do.

Immutability

noun​

1. the state or condition of being unchangeable:

16 For men indeed swear by the greater, and an oath for confirmation is for them an end of all dispute. 17 Thus God, determining to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the [a]immutability of His counsel, [b]confirmed it by an oath, 18 that by two [c]immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we [d]might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us.

Check it out according to the scriptures.

What is the immutability of God? | GotQuestions.org

What is the immutability of God? What does it mean that God is immutable?

www.gotquestions.org

Ephesians 1:11
In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will,

 

[Scott Downey]

And this immutability of God is a very good thing for you who believe in Christ.
You have eternal consolation from God.

 

[Triumph1300]

Is the story of Noah literal?​

Where do you folks draw the line?
Which Bible stories are literal and which are not literal?

Pretty soon the cross is not literal?
What about the resurrection?
Pretty soon satan and his fallen angels are not literal?!

Where is the end of this??

 

[Jericho]

A large percentage of the world’s fauna, including, for example, dodos, sloths, penguins, kangaroos, koalas and many other species, are not native to the Middle East (assuming that was the location of Noah’s ark). How did they travel there to board the ark?

The geography of the pre-flood world was likely different. We know, for instance, that North America and Siberia were once connected by a land bridge, which is how the Native Americans crossed. Go back further, and all the continents were once a supercontinent called Pangea. We can't really know what it was like in Noah's day, but the flood likely caused or was caused by a major tectonic shift. It's also possible the animals weren't as dispersed across the earth as they are now.

The total mass of on-board animals would have been some 400,000 kg, if only yearlings were taken, or some 5 million kg, if adults were taken. Either figure is far more than could be accommodated in the ark as described in the Bible and reconstructed in Kentucky.

Bear in mind, they wouldn't need to take every single species or breed. Everything from a wolf to a chihuahua, for instance, had a common ancestor. The same goes for other animals as well.

The figures in the previous item do not include food and water for a one-year sojourn, which would multiply the weight by at least 10 times if not more. Further, many animals require special diets — silkworms require mulberry leaves, Pandas require bamboo, and snakes, for example, require fresh food. How could fresh food be provided for a full year?

How could large numbers of animals be protected from the many on-board predators, such as lions and tigers?

These two questions are somewhat related. In the full year they are on the ark, there is no indication that they produced offspring. That suggests to me they may have been young (recently weened). If so, they would require less food and haven't fully developed their predatory instincts yet. There is another possibility, albeit speculative. But if God could bring them to the ark, He could also cause them to hibernate for a year. That would drastically cut down on food requirements.

I would add, nearly every ancient culture has a flood tradition, which would make sense if we all descended from Noah. The story would have been passed down from generation to generation. And while the details changed over time, the themes remained. For instance, In 95 percent of the stories the flood was worldwide; in 88 percent, a certain family was favored; in 70 percent, survival was by means of a boat; in 67 percent, animals were also saved; in 66 percent, the flood was due to the wickedness of man; in 66 percent, the survivors had been forewarned; in 57 percent, they ended up on a mountain; in 35 percent, birds were sent out from the boat; and in 9 percent, exactly eight people were spared. That tells me there is a collective memory of a great disaster involving a flood that affected humanity to such a degree that they sought to preserve it in myth and legends.

 

[Oldsoul]

Is the story of Noah literal?​

Where do you folks draw the line?
Which Bible stories are literal and which are not literal?

Pretty soon the cross is not literal?
What about the resurrection?
Pretty soon satan and his fallen angels are not literal?!

Where is the end of this??

Please tell me you are not suggesting that you have the answers and are passing judgement on other people's faith. What you believe is what you believe. That's great, for you. If other people believe/ interpret differently, you, a flawed sinner, are in no position to pass any kind of judgement.

If you meant your post differently, my apologies. Please explain what, exactly, you mean.

 

[Oldsoul]

Well we do have hard empirical science that points to a global flood. But this also will be debated. People do not like to accept that God is capable of speaking the universe into existence in 6 days, destroy the old world with a giant flood nor even raising a body from teh dead that had been drained of its blood!

While I do not disagree with you, I must point something out that seems to be missing in this discussion. Correct me if I am wrong, but is faith not the belief in the unseen/ unproven/ unproveable? The mere act of seeking "proof" undermines the whole idea of faith, doesn't it? Don't get me wrong, finding evidence of biblical events is great for helping to convince "skeptics". However seeking proof for the sake of "proving" one's faith, seems a bit... counter-intuitive doesn't it?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

While I do not disagree with you, I must point something out that seems to be missing in this discussion. Correct me if I am wrong, but is faith not the belief in the unseen/ unproven/ unproveable? The mere act of seeking "proof" undermines the whole idea of faith, doesn't it? Don't get me wrong, finding evidence of biblical events is great for helping to convince "skeptics". However seeking proof for the sake of "proving" one's faith, seems a bit... counter-intuitive doesn't it?

No, faith is the confidence in what we haven't seen. Do you believe the physical resurrection of Jesus is literal? You haven't seen that.

But the evidence for Noah's flood is apparent on and in the earth. remember the flood was a global event and as such would have left abundance evidence to show it happened.

Stratigraphic layers
fossils
fish on mountain tops
land divisions
underground oceans
underground caverns where water was stored.
population demographics
etc.etc.etc.

Faith is not a hope so thing but a know so thing whether we see things or not.

 

[Triumph1300]

Please tell me you are not suggesting that you have the answers and are passing judgement on other people's faith. What you believe is what you believe. That's great, for you. If other people believe/ interpret differently, you, a flawed sinner, are in no position to pass any kind of judgement.

If you meant your post differently, my apologies. Please explain what, exactly, you mean.

Actually I am not passing judgement.
I asked you a question and you do not have the answer.

Here are the questions again:
Where do you folks draw the line?
Which Bible stories are literal and which are not literal?

Turns out you have no answer, and as an alternative you decide to throw in the fact that I am a sinner.
Well you are right about that one.

 

[Oldsoul]

Actually I am not passing judgement.
I asked you a question and you do not have the answer.

Here are the questions again:
Where do you folks draw the line?
Which Bible stories are literal and which are not literal?

Turns out you have no answer, and as an alternative you decide to throw in the fact that I am a sinner.
Well you are right about that one.

Ok, seriously, do you want me to list off each and every biblical story and state whether I take it literally or not? I do not have the time, nor the inclination to do such a thing. My faith, is my faith. Yours is yours. If you want to have an actual discussion, then state your position, and let's discuss. I have stated mine, that seeking proof of the word of God should not be done lightly.

 

[Oldsoul]

No, faith is the confidence in what we haven't seen. Do you believe the physical resurrection of Jesus is literal? You haven't seen that.

But the evidence for Noah's flood is apparent on and in the earth. remember the flood was a global event and as such would have left abundance evidence to show it happened.

Stratigraphic layers
fossils
fish on mountain tops
land divisions
underground oceans
underground caverns where water was stored.
population demographics
etc.etc.etc.

Faith is not a hope so thing but a know so thing whether we see things or not.

We agree on the definition of faith then. For the record, all I was getting at was that seeking proof of God's word should not be done lightly. For me, all the proof I need is in the bible and my lived experience.

As Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear ... I repeat that you must lay aside all prejudice on both sides, and neither believe nor reject any thing because any other person, or description of persons have rejected or believed it. Your own reason is the only oracle given you by heaven, and you are answerable not for the rightness but uprightness of the decision."

 

[Triumph1300]

Ok, seriously, do you want me to list off each and every biblical story and state whether I take it literally or not? I do not have the time, nor the inclination to do such a thing.

Ok, you should have said so in the first place.
No problem.

 

[MatthewG]

Is the flood of Genesis story literal? I have always thought that it was because Jesus referred to the days of Noah and AIG and YECs do a good job of presenting it as literal, what do y’all think? Are Noah’s ark and flood literal scientific facts? « SMR blog

1. A large percentage of the world’s fauna, including, for example, dodos, sloths, penguins, kangaroos, koalas and many other species, are not native to the Middle East (assuming that was the location of Noah’s ark). How did they travel there to board the ark?
2. Island species are particularly vulnerable to predators — when predators have been introduced to an island, they often drive indigenous species to extinction (as has happened in Australia, Hawaii, the Galapagos and numerous other islands). Thus such species would not have been able to survive in the Middle East, away from their naturally protected habitats.
3. The total mass of on-board animals would have been some 400,000 kg, if only yearlings were taken, or some 5 million kg, if adults were taken. Either figure is far more than could be accommodated in the ark as described in the Bible and reconstructed in Kentucky.
4. The figures in the previous item do not include food and water for a one-year sojourn, which would multiply the weight by at least 10 times if not more. Further, many animals require special diets — silkworms require mulberry leaves, Pandas require bamboo, and snakes, for example, require fresh food. How could fresh food be provided for a full year?
5. How could large numbers of animals be protected from the many on-board predators, such as lions and tigers?

What is your view since a year ago? It's gonna most certainly your decision in how you may look at it. There will be many who suggest the whole world was flooded, and there may be those who suggest that it was only in the area that was flooded, and there may be some people who suggest it is just an allegory or something, RLT.

While I maintain my view, of from my taught ways of thinking is that it was in a "area" and not the "whole world," do you think there is a lesson that is taught from the story itself?

 

[RLT63]

What is your view since a year ago? It's gonna most certainly your decision in how you may look at it. There will be many who suggest the whole world was flooded, and there may be those who suggest that it was only in the area that was flooded, and there may be some people who suggest it is just an allegory or something, RLT.

While I maintain my view, of from my taught ways of thinking is that it was in a "area" and not the "whole world," do you think there is a lesson that is taught from the story itself?

I have read that the flood could have been universal without being global.