Reading to discuss:
How should we interpret the Genesis flood account?
Whether or not one considers the flood global or local, reference to the Nephilim in Numbers was an exaggeration–the spies were just very afraid. Just a case of hyperbole. They even referred to themselves as grasshoppers.
I don’t think Dr. Francis Collins or those who agree with him (like myself) are scoffers.
Galileo was persecuted by the church for showing (well, continuing to show) the earth revolves around the sun (they used the Bible as counter-evidence then, too), but they eventually came around, and we’ll come around about evolution and the flood, too. Perhaps the story is written as if creation happened for six days and the the flood was global, but that does not mean there was a global flood or that creation lasted six days, nor does it necessarily discount the authority of scripture–nor more than ceasing to interpret certain language literally (1 Chronicles 16:30, Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, Psalm 104:5, Ecclesiastes 1:5) undermined the authority of scripture in Galileo’s day, though the church at first thought it did.
Regarding “and also afterward” maybe research the original Hebrew and see if an alternative translation is more likely. Do all the translations read similarly?
Something I find interesting is that the angels (with Satan/adversary) are referred to as “sons of God” both in Genesis and Job. Similar language.
I like that Job’s friends sit there and say nothing for a week…they are just ‘there’ for him (at first, anyway). And I like that there is reality and all-out lament in the Bible. It isn’t pruned of the unpleasant, it isn’t just polite discussion.
Note: Job and Jobab are related words. There is another Jobab in Genesis 36, a king in Edom.