Contradiction with Genesis 8:3-5
Describes the floodwaters receding over 150 days, indicating the waters were decreasing, while Genesis 7:19 states they prevailed exceedingly, covering all high hills.
Genesis 8:3-5: And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated. [continually: Heb. in going and returning]
Contradiction with Genesis 9:11
Promises no future floods will destroy the earth, which contrasts with the totality and destruction described in Genesis 7:19.
Genesis 9:11: And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.
Contradiction with Psalms 104:6-9
Implies boundaries set by God for the waters, limiting their spread, contrary to the unbounded coverage of waters in Genesis 7:19.
Psalms 104:6-9: Thou coveredst it with the deep as [with] a garment: the waters stood above the mountains.
Contradiction with 2 Peter 3:6
Suggests waters only altered the existing world, not necessarily covering every high mountain, differing from Genesis 7:19's total coverage narrative.
2 Peter 3:6: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
Paradox #1
Genesis 7:19 describes the extent of the floodwaters covering the Earth. One possible contradiction could be the description of a global flood conflicting with scientific evidence and understanding of Earth's history, which does not support a worldwide flood. This raises questions about the literal interpretation of the event and its reconciliation with geological and historical data.
Paradox #2
Some people argue that a contradiction or conflict with this verse could be the claim that a flood covered all the high mountains on Earth. Critics say there's a lack of geological evidence for a global flood that covered mountains, and it's inconsistent with scientific understanding of Earth's history.
Paradox #3
The contradiction with this verse is that covering all the high mountains under the entire heavens with water would require an impossible amount of water that doesn't exist on or around Earth. The water would have to come from and disappear to somewhere, which can't be explained by our understanding of Earth's water cycle and atmosphere.
Paradox #4
The issue some people point out is related to the claim that waters covered "all the high hills" under the entirety of the heavens, which may conflict with our understanding of geography and the height of mountains. This can lead to questions about the feasibility of the water levels described.