A global flood is simply untenable

[rambot]

The atmosphere was not the only source of water for
the world wide flood, according to the Hebrew Bible.

Scientific evidence you produced is useless when
they/you do not even know exactly what the bible says.

"all the fountains of the great deep broken up..
Genesis 7:11, Genesis 8:2

Yes but of course that is only poetry. That civilization would not have had ANY CONCEPT of underground water systems or anything to that regard.

 

[Ephesians321]

Christ not only confirmed the world wide events of Noah’s day, He said the
same worldwide destruction would come about in our day—only this time in
the form of nuclear world war, he will come to save mankind from extinction.

The Apostle Paul wrote, “By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not
seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house;
by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness
which is by faith”.

Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noe were,
so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

This verse has nothing to do with the temple's destruction in 70 a.d.



When Adam and Eve decided to eat the forbidden fruit
they decided to reject revelation imparted by God.

1 First they rejected direct revelation from God.
2 They used there own observations.
3 They used experimentation, and then
4 They used human reasoning.

Precisely the ‘scientific’ method mankind used by modern science.
Precisely the reasoning you use, to get around the sure word of God.



"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man:
but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

How did Jeremiah know “[T]he host of heaven cannot be numbered.” ?
God asked Job Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Declare, if thou hast understanding. Job 38:4 (KJV)



For some the sure word of God is not sure enough.

Nothing you said is supported by scripture and simply not true.

And the Lord smelled a sweet savour; and the Lord said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
Genesis 8:21

Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me. It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven. Selah.
Psalm 89:35-37

One generation passes away, and another generation comes; But the earth abides forever.
Ecclesiastes 1:4

Of the increase of His government and peace
There will be no end, Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, To order it and establish it with judgment and justice From that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.
Isaiah 9:7

And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.”
Luke 1:31-33

And IN THE DAYS OF THESE KINGS the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.
Daniel 2:44

JESUS WAS CORONATED IN HEAVEN UPON HIS ASCENSION:
“I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And His kingdom the one Which shall not be destroyed.
Daniel 7:13-14

For David says concerning Him ‘I foresaw the Lord always before my face, For He is at my right hand, that I may not be shaken. Therefore my heart rejoiced, and my tongue was glad; Moreover my flesh also will rest in hope. For You will not leave my soul in Hades, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption. You have made known to me the ways of life; You will make me full of joy in Your presence.’ “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear. “For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.” “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
Acts 2:25-36

For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind. “No more shall an infant from there live but a few days, Nor an old man who has not fulfilled his days; For the child shall die one hundred years old, But the sinner being one hundred years old shall be accursed. They shall not labor in vain, Nor bring forth children for trouble; For they shall be the descendants of the blessed of the Lord, And their offspring with them.
Isaiah 65:17,20,23

And I will also take some of them for priests and Levites,” says the Lord. “For as the new heavens and the new earth Which I will make shall remain before Me,” says the Lord, “So shall your descendants and your name remain. And it shall come to pass That from one New Moon to another, And from one Sabbath to another, All flesh shall come to worship before Me,” says the Lord. “And they shall go forth and look Upon the corpses of the men Who have transgressed against Me. For their worm does not die, And their fire is not quenched. They shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”
Isaiah 66:21-24

Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.
Revelation 21:1,22:2,14-15

Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.
Ephesians 3:21

ELEMENTS WILL MELT WITH FERVENT HEAT (2 Peter 3)

2 Peter 3 is often cited as proof positive the coming of the Lord is future because they believe it teaches all the physical elements of earth and heaven are going to burn in a world-ending conflagration, which, obviously, has not happened. We will take a look at this passage in the context of the first century readers to whom it was written.

1. “In the last days mockers will come, walking after their own lusts and saying, “Where is the promise of his coming? For, from the day that the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.” Vv. 3-4
“The last days” was a reference to the last days of the Old Covenant. Jesus prophesied the “coming of the Son of Man” and the destruction of the temple would occur in the disciple’s generation. Now, approximately 34 years later, around late AD 64, the temple was still standing and temple worship continued just as it had for so many years.

2. “For they willfully forget that there were heavens from of old, and an earth formed out of water and amid water by the word of God, by which means the world [social order] that existed then, being overflowed with water, perished.” Vv. 5-6
The mockers willfully forgot their history regarding Noah’s day when the unrighteous were swept from the land. It is important to note the physical earth was not destroyed with the flood, but rather, the world of ungodly men. The same would be true of the coming national judgment of Israel and the destruction of the Old Covenant in AD 70.

3. “But the heavens that exist now and the earth, by the same word have been stored up for fire, being reserved against the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.” V. 7
“Heaven and earth” was a figure of speech used for the Mosaic Covenant (“I…have covered you in the shadow of my hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and tell Zion, ‘You are my people.’” Is 51:16) But Jesus taught the covenant relationship was broken and would be abolished with the destruction of Jerusalem. (The King “sent his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city.” Mt. 22:7) “Fire” denotes God’s wrath, is purifying, and was the chief weapon of war in ancient times. Jesus said he came to throw fire on earth in reference to the coming national judgment.

4. “But don’t forget this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slow concerning his promise, as some count slowness; but he is patient with us, not wishing that anyone should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” Vv. 8-9
A 40 year period (a generation) was given for Israel to repent and come to faith in their Messiah. At Peter’s writing, approximately 35 years had passed and detractors were ridiculing the veracity of the prophecy.

5. “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fervent heat; and the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.” V. 10
Here we have typical Hebraic eschatological pictorial language in reference to the uprooting of the Old Covenant social order. The “world” of covenant Israel would be destroyed. The Greek word “elements” [#4747 stoixeíon] referred to the elements of religious training or ceremonial precepts. (See: He 5:12, Gal 4:3, 4:9, Col 2:8, 2:20) With the temple’s destruction, any semblance of Old Covenant worship rites was made impossible. The temple was literally taken apart as Roman soldiers salvaged the melted gold from its stones.

6. “Looking for and earnestly desiring the coming of the day of God, which will cause the burning heavens to be dissolved, and the elements [temple practice] will melt with fervent heat.” V. 12
The day of the Lord was imminent. Peter’s audience would witness the demolition of the Old Covenant (their heaven and earth) with the burning of Jerusalem and the temple. Just as in Noah’s day, it would be the society of ungodly men who would be destroyed, not the entire creation.

7. “We look for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.” V. 13 The destruction of the Old Covenant ushered in the New more perfect Covenant. The essence of the new heaven and new earth is reconciliation with God. “God with us” is our present reality.

Notes:
The coming of the Son of Man (v 3) = the day of the Lord (v 10) = coming of the day of God (v 12). _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ADDENDA: WERE THERE ZEALOTS IN THE JERUSALEM CHURCH?

Peter was writing in response to false teachers in the church, and, from our recent studies, their description in 2 Peter 2 is familiar to us. Their boorish, uncouth demeanor reminds us of the zealots we encounter in Josephus’ “Wars of the Jews”. Peter identified his ministry as taking place in “Babylon” (I Peter 5:13), which we have determined to be Jerusalem, where the zealot movement was gaining strength. The following is a brief comparison of Peter’s description and zealot behavior during the war.

1. “…those who walk after the flesh in the lust of defilement [degradation] and despise authority. Daring, self-willed, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries…” V. 10
Jesus, the high priest reported: “They [zealots] are robbers, who by their prodigious wickedness have profaned this most sacred floor [temple], and who are to be now seen drinking themselves drunk in the sanctuary, and expending the spoils of those whom they have slaughtered upon their insatiable bellies.” Wars 4.4.3

2. “But these, as unreasoning beasts, creatures of instinct to be taken and destroyed, speaking evil in matters about which they are ignorant, will in their destroying surely be destroyed.” V. 12
High priest Jesus, son of Gamaliel, referred to the zealots as wild beasts: “And this place [Jerusalem], which is adored by the habitable world… is trampled upon by these wild beasts born among ourselves.” Wars 4.4.3

3. “Receiving the wages of unrighteousness; people who count it pleasure to revel [carouse] in the daytime, spots and defects, reveling in their deceit while they feast with you;” V. 13
The zealots dressed up like prostitutes: “while their faces looked like the faces of women, they killed with their right hands; and when their gait was effeminate, they presently attacked men, and became warriors, and drew their swords from under their finely dyed cloaks, and ran every body through whom they alighted upon.” Wars 4.9.10

4. “…having eyes full of adultery, and who can’t cease from sin, enticing unsettled souls, having a heart trained in greed, accursed children!” V. 14
“Their [zealots] inclination to plunder was insatiable, as was their zeal in searching the houses of the rich; and for the murdering of the men, and abusing of the women, it was sport to them.” Wars 4.9.10

5. Uttering great swelling words of emptiness, they entice in the lusts of the flesh, by licentiousness [lacking moral restraint], those who are indeed escaping from those who live in error. V.18
“But for John [zealot leader]… went about among all the people, and persuaded them to go to war, by the hopes he gave them. He affirmed that the affairs of the Romans were in a weak condition, and extolled his own power.” Wars 4.3.1

6. “Promising them liberty, while they themselves are bondservants of corruption.” V. 19
The slogan of zealotry was to have only God as their ruler, however, they worshipped the gods of power and wealth.

Notes: For more illustrations of the nature of the zealots, see Josephus, “The Wars of the Jews”

 

[rambot]

The atmosphere was not the only source of water for
the world wide flood, according to the Hebrew Bible.

Scientific evidence you produced is useless when
they/you do not even know exactly what the bible says.

"all the fountains of the great deep broken up..
Genesis 7:11, Genesis 8:2

Massive ocean discovered beneath the Earth's crust
containing more water than on the surface

MSN

https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.1253358

Evidence of Fountains of the Great Deep?

Two recent articles in Nature Geoscience may provide important validations of the global Flood. Did researchers find evidence of the “fountains of the great deep” that started the deluge? Timothy Paulsen, from the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, and co-authors from Michigan Technological...

www.icr.org

There was plenty enough water to have a world -wide flood.

I would posit that if water came up from 600km below the earth's surface, there would DEFINITELY be evidence of that; moreso if it happenned in the last 5000yrs.

Also note: They didn't "find" it. There are suggestions that it exists down there. I would also posit that if a lot of that water was expounded out, it would come out as steam since that far down into the earth's surface...it's pretty toasty warm....like over 1000C. Of course the pressure down below is such that it could likely still be water despite the high temperature. But it would would become steam if it got released....

 

[Job 33:6]

Too many species, too many mouths to feed. And if you're YEC you have over 1,000 species of dinosaurs and therapod dinosaurs to contend with. And frankly we are definitely on their menu. The Ark would need warehouse sized food and water storages. And what about waste disposal? The stinkiest ark to have ever sailed the global sea. Have you ever driven past a cattle farm but imagine that on a larger scale in an enclosed space? I think Christianity especially the Fundies, may need to accept that the flood was a massive regional one and likely a passed down oral tradition that may grew alittle larger each time it was taught and that was eventually became canonized by Moses and the ancient scribes. But furthermore, it fits the pattern of Yahweh's judgment of the nations throughout the Old Testament. In fact, both Jesus and Peter drew comparisons between the Flood and the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70 itself a regional, national judgment.

View attachment 339512
View attachment 339513

The Bible is not a science textbook.

 

[Ephesians321]

The Bible is not a science textbook.

Absolutely 100% agreed Christians do not need to contend with science at all. Science poses no threat to both creation and the flood stories of the Bible at all. Once believers realize the creation is simply revealing truths about God, man, and their relationship in creation and the faith. And that the flood was strictly a regional one and perhaps God did it to protect the Messianic bloodline because Satan was running wild amongst corrupt primordial man and probably even endangered the salvation of Enoch (so God took him before he became corrupt too). Both are beautiful stories that do not need to fight against science.

 

[Sir Joseph]

The only way to dismiss the Global flood event is to reject the Genesis 6-8 account written by Moses as a clearly detailed, literal historical event. Doing that requires one to also dismiss Peter's reference to the world deluge in 1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4-5, and 2 Peter 3:5-6, Jesus' reference to it in Matthew 24; 37-39 and Luke 17:26-27; and Paul's affirmation of all scripture being inspired by God and useful for teaching, rebuking, and correcting in 2 Timothy 3:16.

I don't understand why any Christian would take sides with the atheists in arguing so fervently against the Bible, since doing so undermines the very foundation of their supposed faith. In this case though, even my best atheist friend has enough common sense to accept the realty of a cataclysmic global flood event based upon stories from over 300 cultures covering every continent on the earth and the presence of marine fossils on all of the world's highest mountains. Of course he has to dismiss the Bible's version in order to maintain his secular world view, but what excuse or reason has the Christian to do the same?

Anyone who's studied the matter much knows that there are several published models demonstrating the feasibility of the ark and entire Noahic flood account. Let the skeptics ask the oft repeated questions, but don't be surprised when they ignore the reasonable answers. To those who understand and respect the Bible as God's Divinely inspired word, you can have confidence in the historical and scientific evidence supporting it. To those who reject the Bible's Genesis accounts, I'd ask why you think you know more than Moses, Peter, Paul, and Jesus about historical events?

Here's another way to consider the viewpoint of any Christian arguing against the Bible's historical accuracy or authority, be it the issue of creation or the flood. Is it rational to reject the Bible's Genesis accounts which have abundant scientific evidence to support them while accepting the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus which has very limited scientific evidence? I'd suggest that logical consistency dictates that a Christian's faith is based upon the entire Bible's truth and authority - as Jesus and the apostles affirmed.

 

[Ephesians321]

The only way to dismiss the Global flood event is to reject the Genesis 6-8 account written by Moses as a clearly detailed, literal historical event. Doing that requires one to also dismiss Peter's reference to the world deluge in 1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4-5, and 2 Peter 3:5-6, Jesus' reference to it in Matthew 24; 37-39 and Luke 17:26-27; and Paul's affirmation of all scripture being inspired by God and useful for teaching, rebuking, and correcting in 2 Timothy 3:16.

I don't understand why any Christian would take sides with the atheists in arguing so fervently against the Bible, since doing so undermines the very foundation of their supposed faith. In this case though, even my best atheist friend has enough common sense to accept the realty of a cataclysmic global flood event based upon stories from over 300 cultures covering every continent on the earth and the presence of marine fossils on all of the world's highest mountains. Of course he has to dismiss the Bible's version in order to maintain his secular world view, but what excuse or reason has the Christian to do the same?

Anyone who's studied the matter much knows that there are several published models demonstrating the feasibility of the ark and entire Noahic flood account. Let the skeptics ask the oft repeated questions, but don't be surprised when they ignore the reasonable answers. To those who understand and respect the Bible as God's Divinely inspired word, you can have confidence in the historical and scientific evidence supporting it. To those who reject the Bible's Genesis accounts, I'd ask why you think you know more than Moses, Peter, Paul, and Jesus about historical events?

Here's another way to consider the viewpoint of any Christian arguing against the Bible's historical accuracy or authority, be it the issue of creation or the flood. Is it rational to reject the Bible's Genesis accounts which have abundant scientific evidence to support them while accepting the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus which has very limited scientific evidence? I'd suggest that logical consistency dictates that a Christian's faith is based upon the entire Bible's truth and authority - as Jesus and the apostles affirmed.

All that matters is the spiritual truths we gain from the Genesis account of creation and the flood we don't need to contend with science and we commit a no greater injustice to text than give it a close-minded throwback literal eisegesis. The flood was regional and so was the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. They are two pairs of a kind. Two floods, Daniel 9:26-27.

 

[Job 33:6]

The only way to dismiss the Global flood event is to reject the Genesis 6-8 account written by Moses as a clearly detailed, literal historical event. Doing that requires one to also dismiss Peter's reference to the world deluge in 1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4-5, and 2 Peter 3:5-6, Jesus' reference to it in Matthew 24; 37-39 and Luke 17:26-27; and Paul's affirmation of all scripture being inspired by God and useful for teaching, rebuking, and correcting in 2 Timothy 3:16.

I don't understand why any Christian would take sides with the atheists in arguing so fervently against the Bible, since doing so undermines the very foundation of their supposed faith. In this case though, even my best atheist friend has enough common sense to accept the realty of a cataclysmic global flood event based upon stories from over 300 cultures covering every continent on the earth and the presence of marine fossils on all of the world's highest mountains. Of course he has to dismiss the Bible's version in order to maintain his secular world view, but what excuse or reason has the Christian to do the same?

Anyone who's studied the matter much knows that there are several published models demonstrating the feasibility of the ark and entire Noahic flood account. Let the skeptics ask the oft repeated questions, but don't be surprised when they ignore the reasonable answers. To those who understand and respect the Bible as God's Divinely inspired word, you can have confidence in the historical and scientific evidence supporting it. To those who reject the Bible's Genesis accounts, I'd ask why you think you know more than Moses, Peter, Paul, and Jesus about historical events?

Here's another way to consider the viewpoint of any Christian arguing against the Bible's historical accuracy or authority, be it the issue of creation or the flood. Is it rational to reject the Bible's Genesis accounts which have abundant scientific evidence to support them while accepting the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus which has very limited scientific evidence? I'd suggest that logical consistency dictates that a Christian's faith is based upon the entire Bible's truth and authority - as Jesus and the apostles affirmed.

A clearly detailed, literal, historical event?

In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened.
Genesis 7:11

the fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed, the rain from the heavens was restrained,
Genesis 8:2

I'm assuming you don't believe in sky portals opening and closing to release a sky ocean/waters above?

 

[Job 33:6]

The only way to dismiss the Global flood event is to reject the Genesis 6-8 account written by Moses as a clearly detailed, literal historical event. Doing that requires one to also dismiss Peter's reference to the world deluge in 1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4-5, and 2 Peter 3:5-6, Jesus' reference to it in Matthew 24; 37-39 and Luke 17:26-27; and Paul's affirmation of all scripture being inspired by God and useful for teaching, rebuking, and correcting in 2 Timothy 3:16.

I don't understand why any Christian would take sides with the atheists in arguing so fervently against the Bible, since doing so undermines the very foundation of their supposed faith. In this case though, even my best atheist friend has enough common sense to accept the realty of a cataclysmic global flood event based upon stories from over 300 cultures covering every continent on the earth and the presence of marine fossils on all of the world's highest mountains. Of course he has to dismiss the Bible's version in order to maintain his secular world view, but what excuse or reason has the Christian to do the same?

Anyone who's studied the matter much knows that there are several published models demonstrating the feasibility of the ark and entire Noahic flood account. Let the skeptics ask the oft repeated questions, but don't be surprised when they ignore the reasonable answers. To those who understand and respect the Bible as God's Divinely inspired word, you can have confidence in the historical and scientific evidence supporting it. To those who reject the Bible's Genesis accounts, I'd ask why you think you know more than Moses, Peter, Paul, and Jesus about historical events?

Here's another way to consider the viewpoint of any Christian arguing against the Bible's historical accuracy or authority, be it the issue of creation or the flood. Is it rational to reject the Bible's Genesis accounts which have abundant scientific evidence to support them while accepting the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus which has very limited scientific evidence? I'd suggest that logical consistency dictates that a Christian's faith is based upon the entire Bible's truth and authority - as Jesus and the apostles affirmed.

1 and 2 Peter include a lot of language in association with the book of Enoch. In fact, Enoch is referenced in Jude, as are other apocryphal texts.

The book of Enoch's literature parallels that of the mesopotamian apkallu, that is the rebellion of the watchers. And anyone who has actually read any of these texts, 1 Enoch, the book of the giants, ancient near east texts on the mesopotamian apkallu, hesiods theodicy etc. knows full well that they are anything but literal historical texts.

Michael Heiser on the mesopotamian apkallu:

The book of the giants:

 

[Job 33:6]

1 and 2 Peter include a lot of language in association with the book of Enoch. In fact, Enoch is referenced in Jude, as are other apocryphal texts.

The book of Enoch's literature parallels that of the mesopotamian apkallu, that is the rebellion of the watchers. And anyone who has actually read any of these texts, 1 Enoch, the book of the giants, ancient near east texts on the mesopotamian apkallu, hesiods theodicy etc. knows full well that they are anything but literal historical texts.

Michael Heiser on the mesopotamian apkallu:

The book of the giants:

It's also worth noting that the nephelim survived the flood. See numbers 13:33.

‭‭Numbers‬ ‭13:33‬ ‭ESV‬‬
[33] And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.”

A regional flood can address the ancient near east context. A global flood cannot.

 

[rambot]

The only way to dismiss the Global flood event is to reject the Genesis 6-8 account written by Moses as a clearly detailed, literal historical event.

1. no proof ive seen its written by moses.
2. NO proof it was meant to be take literally either.

Doing that requires one to also dismiss Peter's reference to the world deluge in 1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4-5, and 2 Peter 3:5-6, Jesus' reference to it in Matthew 24; 37-39 and Luke 17:26-27; and Paul's affirmation of all scripture being inspired by God and useful for teaching, rebuking, and correcting in 2 Timothy 3:16.

1. Those verses are referring the custom belief, they are not proof of a flood. I'll grant that their known world was flooded.
2. Having an expectation of a nonliteral understanding does not preclude God inspired scripture.

I don't understand why any Christian would take sides with the atheists in arguing so fervently against the Bible, since doing so undermines the very foundation of their supposed faith.

Having a nonliteral interpretarion od this story does not threaten the idea that Jesus died foe my sins. Sorry. It may foe you but id hope you wouldnt trach your children yhat necause eventually it wont be enough.

In this case though, even my best atheist friend has enough common sense to accept the realty of a cataclysmic global flood event based upon stories from over 300 cultures covering every continent on the earth and the presence of marine fossils on all of the world's highest mountains.

No he didn't. He just gave up trying to convince you.
And they ABSOKUTELY DO NO "cover thr continents. They are all based in cultures that live near major bodies of water OR migrated feom such.

The fossils we see would not foem in so short a time.

Of course he has to dismiss the Bible's version in order to maintain his secular world view, but what excuse or reason has the Christian to do the same?

You keep conflating the "biblical version" with "literal translation".

Anyone who's studied the matter much knows that there are several published models demonstrating the feasibility of the ark and entire Noahic flood account.

If that's the conclusion you studied from people who should not be listened to or respected as scientists or anyone purporting to be rational.

Let the skeptics ask the oft repeated questions, but don't be surprised when they ignore the reasonable answers.

I've never heard one but just because they are reasonable doesn't mean they are correct. Show the evidence.

To those who understand and respect the Bible as God's Divinely inspired word, you can have confidence in the historical and scientific evidence supporting it.

No you cannot.

To those who reject the Bible's Genesis accounts, I'd ask why you think you know more than Moses, Peter, Paul, and Jesus about historical events?

You asked if I know more about the world that Peter, Moses and Paul?
Yes I do.

For example, I know North America exists.
Do you need more?

Here's another way to consider the viewpoint of any Christian arguing against the Bible's historical accuracy or authority, be it the issue of creation or the flood. Is it rational to reject the Bible's Genesis accounts which have abundant scientific evidence to support them while accepting the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus which has very limited scientific evidence?

It does not have abundant scientific evidence guy. That's what I keep saying.

So your question is moot.

I'd suggest that logical consistency dictates that a Christian's faith is based upon the entire Bible's truth and authority - as Jesus and the apostles affirmed.

"Faith is believing I things not seen".

That is faith.

That is not science or reason.

 

[stevevw]

Too many species, too many mouths to feed. And if you're YEC you have over 1,000 species of dinosaurs and therapod dinosaurs to contend with. And frankly we are definitely on their menu. The Ark would need warehouse sized food and water storages. And what about waste disposal? The stinkiest ark to have ever sailed the global sea. Have you ever driven past a cattle farm but imagine that on a larger scale in an enclosed space? I think Christianity especially the Fundies, may need to accept that the flood was a massive regional one and likely a passed down oral tradition that may grew alittle larger each time it was taught and that was eventually became canonized by Moses and the ancient scribes. But furthermore, it fits the pattern of Yahweh's judgment of the nations throughout the Old Testament. In fact, both Jesus and Peter drew comparisons between the Flood and the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70 itself a regional, national judgment.

View attachment 339512
View attachment 339513

Theres some interesting docos on the idea that many civilizations have a Flood story across the world which seem to have striking similarities based on some catastrophe around 12,800 years ago.

 

[Divide]

Too many species, too many mouths to feed. And if you're YEC you have over 1,000 species of dinosaurs and therapod dinosaurs to contend with. And frankly we are definitely on their menu. The Ark would need warehouse sized food and water storages. And what about waste disposal? The stinkiest ark to have ever sailed the global sea. Have you ever driven past a cattle farm but imagine that on a larger scale in an enclosed space? I think Christianity especially the Fundies, may need to accept that the flood was a massive regional one and likely a passed down oral tradition that may grew alittle larger each time it was taught and that was eventually became canonized by Moses and the ancient scribes. But furthermore, it fits the pattern of Yahweh's judgment of the nations throughout the Old Testament. In fact, both Jesus and Peter drew comparisons between the Flood and the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70 itself a regional, national judgment.

View attachment 339512
View attachment 339513

You don't think that Noah took full grown animals onto the ark do you? That would have been dumb. baby animals eat less and poop less. Nevertheless, I bet it was ripe in that ark, even with windows. We had livestock when I was a kid and the barn still stunk with the door open, lol.

 

[Divide]

Lively thread. Did you know that you can tell how someone reads the bible by their viewpoint? I see there are some here who read it as allegorical and not literal. Not only that, but you'll also be able to predict how they feel about other biblical stories and concepts.

Every time that I have have ever been wrong in an interpretation of a bible passage it came out that I was wrong because I didnt take the passage literal enough.

The flood did happen and it was worldwide just like it says. The Lord means what He says and He says what He means. Almost all cultures have an historical account of a great flood. Are they all lying?

One day, we'll be before Jesus and what if He says, why did you so fervently talk against my book?

Will you give him a big diatribe that explains how the flood really didn't happen?! He will tell you, I wrote it down in my book to you, I made it very plain...

Man that would be embarassing!

What if He says, did you read my book that I wrote for you? Most people wont read it. Many more have never read it all the way through cover to cover!

No Lord I didn't because it was inaaacurate blah blah blah and so I couldn't trust it?!!!

The flood was really mostly about being a shadow of things to come. Judgement is coming and a few will be saved. Sounds very much like the great tribulation and the rapture, huh?

But the rapture is another thread. I already know that these guys see the rapture as allegorical too. You have to read your bible more. The first 18 things (sic) that it teaches you is, read the word, read the word, read the word, pray without ceasing, read the word...and so on. Reading your bible more will increase your faith, and understanding.

 

[Derf]

Too many species, too many mouths to feed. And if you're YEC you have over 1,000 species of dinosaurs and therapod dinosaurs to contend with. And frankly we are definitely on their menu. The Ark would need warehouse sized food and water storages. And what about waste disposal? The stinkiest ark to have ever sailed the global sea. Have you ever driven past a cattle farm but imagine that on a larger scale in an enclosed space? I think Christianity especially the Fundies, may need to accept that the flood was a massive regional one and likely a passed down oral tradition that may grew alittle larger each time it was taught and that was eventually became canonized by Moses and the ancient scribes. But furthermore, it fits the pattern of Yahweh's judgment of the nations throughout the Old Testament. In fact, both Jesus and Peter drew comparisons between the Flood and the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70 itself a regional, national judgment.

View attachment 339512
View attachment 339513

Where does the bible use the word "species"? It is a concept that seems foreign to the authors. And even scientists are unsure where species boundaries are.

Dinosaur Ranks Shrink as Species Numbers Dwindle

Triceratops is one of the most recognizable dinosaurs, known from partially complete fossilized skeletons to have large armor plate and three horns on its head. At almost 30 feet long, it was perhaps one third the length of Torosaurus, which also had a large armor plate and three horns. Long...

www.icr.org

All Those New Dinosaurs May Not Be New — Or Dinosaurs

Things that happen on a weekly basis: Trash pickup. Church (if you’re into that). Saturday morning brunch with Susan. (I’m sorry I missed last week, Susan. I’ll…

fivethirtyeight.com

 

[stevevw]

Theres some interesting docos on the idea that many civilizations have a Flood story across the world which seem to have striking similarities based on some catastrophe around 12,800 years ago.

After rewatching the video some thoughts came to me. They mention a number of anomelies that seem contradictory to the traditional science view of gradualism. Or the gradual gaining of knowledge from simple humans to more technologically based.

For example the large boulders found in odd places, the large ripples effects found over wide areas of land and other evidence of a large flood are explained away as being natural processes rather than possible evidence of a large flood. As Hancock mentions any mention of Catastrophe and scientists steep in the traditional paradigm react like the person is a heretic. Just like the Church reacted to those who questioned their interpretation.

First its clear to see there is a conformation bias on both sides. We always knew religion had it as everyone made jokes and rideculed it and even Christians have acknowledged that. But science has mainly been unquestioned. Well a least the so called experts. As mentioned in the video now people are questioning the claims of science or at least their assumptions about how everything came about.

I hear this a lot about people saying "everything you have been told is a lie" or "everything is not how its been told" about our history. I think we are beginning to see this is in fact true. As people are beginning to see for themselves, as knowledge increases about our past, as we are discovering more in the ground we are seeing a different history to what we have been told.

It seems to me there was a time long ago where humans were just as knowledgable perhaps even more than modern man. They may not have had cities like we do or the tech but for the amount of time they were on earth it seems by the archeological evidence they were very advanced and built cities and had their own version of tech.

They also had a common religious worldview associated with the sky and similar architecture and a number of other similarities that go beyond just being a coincident. The mainstream explanation is that it is a coincident or the enviornment shaped them. Nevertheless these humans lived with the mega creatures and it seems they all disappeared in a short time period to be explained by the standard scientific explanation.

So perhaps we are beginning to see the real picture of what happened and it seems to me it shows that there was once an very advanced people all over the world or the known world and that there was a great flood event that may have wiped them out. The fact that we are finding most of these ancient peoples deep under sediments seems to point to them being covered quickly and not through gradual processes.

These ancient peoples looked to the skies they made gods from stone. Is this the preflood human race where the Bible says completely turned away from God that everyone sinned all the time. They were all wiped out and we began again with what we call the birth of civilization Mesopotamia bringing forth Noahs line through Abraham and Moses.

 

[The Barbarian]

A large ark and speciation easily account for all of it.

Wrong. The kind of superhyperevolution visualized by the creationists to get around the limitations of the Ark just didn't happen. If it did, new species would be popping up every month. If it did, it's odd that no one seems to have thought that to be worth mentioning. And literature and art from those early times shows all the species already in place.

No adult really believes stories like this.

 

[The Barbarian]

But science has mainly been unquestioned.

It's questioned constantly. That's how new theories replace old ones. Someone finds a more accurate description of the phenomena.

Would you like some examples?

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:
A large ark and speciation easily account for all of it.

Wrong.

you'll need to do better than that.

The kind of superhyperevolution visualized by the creationists to get around the limitations of the Ark just didn't happen.

prove it.

If it did, new species would be popping up every month.

wrong

make a compelling case.

====================

Meanwhile... while we wait....

Speciation and the Animals on the Ark

Many people who use biological data to support an old-earth position believe that the appearance of millions of animal species does not support a young earth interpretation of creation. Nor do they think that a recent global Flood would support the existence of a great number of animals today if...

www.icr.org

"Reproductive isolation can occur in a number of ways and result in speciation from one kind of animal through events that isolate one variation (species) from another. Many of these isolation events have been identified and are described as behavioral isolation, ecological isolation, and geographical isolation, to name a few.


"Geographical isolation is one of the best understood events and likely the most common. Geographical isolation results when two variations of the same kind of animal migrate and become separated by a geographical barrier"

No adult really believes stories like this.

ahhh yes - the 'dark ages' solution of "name calling and pejoratives" instead of science fact. Ok I guess we have seen that before.

 

[Derf]

Wrong. The kind of superhyperevolution visualized by the creationists to get around the limitations of the Ark just didn't happen. If it did, new species would be popping up every month. If it did, it's odd that no one seems to have thought that to be worth mentioning. And literature and art from those early times shows all the species already in place.

Popping out all over the place:
"Now new research, reported today in the journal Science, describes a run of salmon that colonized a river and a lake beach, and evolved partial reproductive isolation in fewer than 13 generations. Natural selection, it appears, can spur the emergence of new species far faster than expected."
From: High-Speed Speciation

No adult really believes stories like this.

You've taken years off my age! I'm a teenager again!