Does The Great Deluge In Genesis Of Necessity Must Be Local?

random person

1 COR. 10:11; HEB. 1:2; HEB. 9:26,28; 1 PET. 1:20
Dec 10, 2013
3,646
262
Riverside California
✟14,087.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Here an atheist/agnostic/non-believer calculated the math surrounding Noah, his ark, and a global flood, here is his results:


Another thing, how did 8 people manage to feed one million plus or even hundreds of thousands of animals over the course of a year, some animals require hundreds of pounds of nutrition everyday.

How could largest zoo the world has ever seen, set in a giant ship floating on a flooded earth, be maintained by a miniscule staff of eight? Image the work that would be required daily? Would they need to work 16 hour shifts... 20 hour shifts daily? They would be dead on their feet every day.
 

random person

1 COR. 10:11; HEB. 1:2; HEB. 9:26,28; 1 PET. 1:20
Dec 10, 2013
3,646
262
Riverside California
✟14,087.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Ken Ham called out Bill Nye and invited him to come debate at the Creation Museum, whereby Bill Nye proceeded to dismantle Ken Ham. Now, I do believe in Noah's ark and the flood, however, I believe it is a local event and nonetheless the largest zoo the world has ever witnessed inside a giant boat (something that may have been en vogue in 4000 BCE or so), riding collectively on the rough seas/oceans of a completely flooded earth for a whole year, and understaffed by a family of eight. Well...

 
Upvote 0

AphroditeGoneAwry

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2012
517
173
Montana
Visit site
✟9,083.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
The point is that God decimated all life as He knew it. Except for 8 person who He cared enough about to found His chosen ones, His line of Shem.

Local or global makes no real difference. We are invited to partake in the journey with God wearing 3D glasses or not. If you cannot handle the ride, best to leave them off. Either way, the truth is the same.

~Selah
 
Upvote 0

random person

1 COR. 10:11; HEB. 1:2; HEB. 9:26,28; 1 PET. 1:20
Dec 10, 2013
3,646
262
Riverside California
✟14,087.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
The point is that God decimated all life as He knew it.

Now I must ask, if God decimated all life as He knew it, then how was each and every species preserved?

And if only a basic kinds/typess was preserved, then there must have been a heck of alot of mutating or evolving over a 2,000 year period to recreate the diversity we had before the flood?

If whole species were decimated except for two pairs on the ark, how did all of those animals fit on the ark?

If it was just the basic types/kinds that were saved on the ark, that means alot of pre-flood species became instinctly extinct and the surviving basic types/kinds must have done alot evolving or mutating in a 2,000 year span or so to recreate the diversity of life (species) we see today?

For example, there are nonvenomous snakes and there are venomous snakes? There are birds of flight and there is flightless birds?
 
Upvote 0

AphroditeGoneAwry

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2012
517
173
Montana
Visit site
✟9,083.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Now I must ask, if God decimated all life as He knew it, then how was each and every species preserved?

And if only a basic kinds/typess was preserved, then there must have been a heck of alot of mutating or evolving over a 2,000 year period to recreate the diversity we had before the flood?

If whole species were decimated except for two pairs on the ark, how did all of those animals fit on the ark?

If it was just the basic types/kinds that were saved on the ark, that means alot of pre-flood species became instinctly extinct and the surviving basic types/kinds must have done alot evolving or mutating in a 2,000 year span or so to recreate the diversity of life (species) we see today?

For example, there are nonvenomous snakes and there are venomous snakes?

I meant that was not on the ark, dingbat. :)
 
Upvote 0

random person

1 COR. 10:11; HEB. 1:2; HEB. 9:26,28; 1 PET. 1:20
Dec 10, 2013
3,646
262
Riverside California
✟14,087.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
I meant that was not on the ark, dingbat. :)

But is precisely the point I am making.

If it was only kinds/types. That means one lucky single pair of birds were saved. One lucky single pair of snakes were saved. One lucky single pair of cats were saved.

But if it was species, that means every bird species had to be accounted for. That every snake species had to be accounted for. Every cat species had to be accounted for. Etc, etc.
 
Upvote 0

AphroditeGoneAwry

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2012
517
173
Montana
Visit site
✟9,083.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
But is precisely the point I am making.

If it was only kinds/types. That means one lucky single pair of birds were saved. One lucky single pair of snakes were saved. One lucky single pair of cats were saved.

But if it was species, that means every bird species had to be accounted for. That every snake species had to be accounted for. Every cat species had to be accounted for. Etc, etc.

Kind is all that matters. Species is a scientific term invented by man.

The point is that God saved 7 clean pairs of animals and 2 unclean pairs of animals and 8 exemplary humans from utter destruction. From these souls His chosen ones were extenuated.
 
Upvote 0

random person

1 COR. 10:11; HEB. 1:2; HEB. 9:26,28; 1 PET. 1:20
Dec 10, 2013
3,646
262
Riverside California
✟14,087.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Kind is all that matters. Species is a scientific term invented by man.

The point is that God saved 7 clean pairs of animals and 2 unclean pairs of animals and 8 exemplary humans from utter destruction. From these souls His chosen ones were extenuated.

Take snakes for instance, he saved giant anacondas, giant boa constrictors, pit vipers, vipers, rattlesnakes, elapidaes (cobras and its relatives), constrictors great and small, otherwise if it were a single pair of snakes to represent all snakes... than the pair that survived on the ark is the common ancestor of all of the above.
 
Upvote 0

random person

1 COR. 10:11; HEB. 1:2; HEB. 9:26,28; 1 PET. 1:20
Dec 10, 2013
3,646
262
Riverside California
✟14,087.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
I just want to reiterate and hit on some points here:

I have serious, very serious issues in the belief in a global flood. It is seriously debunked in both of these videos.

If on one hand we save just all types and kinds were saved, then what do we have?

That on the ark were the common ancestors of each and every species on earth today... well, then that proves evolution is true only it happened within several hundred years or a couple of thousand years at most. By taking this position, one inevitable takes the stance of hyper-evolution.

And as demonstrated in the video #1, it is impossible for all species to have been saved on the ark, as they would have had one 1 cubit foot of space on the boat to itself, well that's science fiction, that's "Honey, I shrunk the zoo". Plus, 8 souls tending to 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 individual animals, in the confined space of a giant boat, for a whole long year. Really?

Think about it for a moment, imagine the daily raucous of all those animals crying, screeching, bleating, etc, and the combined smell of all that animal waste?

I am not railing against the Spirit-inspired scriptures. But is it within the realm of possibility, what we are to extract from the creation story and Noah's ark are spiritual truths that fitted within the the structure of ancient oral traditions?

To sum up this post, beware of creation science, don't be a flat-earther. Who's to say alot of today's science findings has not elated God? The sciences that are not destroying His creation of course.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Percivale

Sam
Supporter
Feb 13, 2012
924
206
Southern Indiana
✟122,996.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
All the earth didn't mean the same thing to ancient Israel as it does to us, for instance 'all the earth' came to Egypt to get grain during the famine. So a local flood can be consistent with the Bible. And there is clear archaeological evidence that there was a significant flood in mesopotamia between 2 and 3 thousand BC. What perplexes me, is that if the flood happened then and there, it couldn't have killed everyone who wasn't on the ark, yet that seems to be the flood the Bible is talking about, which is one reason I doubt it is inerrant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: random person
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

random person

1 COR. 10:11; HEB. 1:2; HEB. 9:26,28; 1 PET. 1:20
Dec 10, 2013
3,646
262
Riverside California
✟14,087.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Noah's Floating Zoo​



Those who claim a universal flood say every species on earth was brought into the ark. The Bible tells us every "clean" animal were brought by sevens and the unclean animals by twos. (Genesis 7:2) For the universal theory to be correct, Noah would have been required to bring a sample of each species now living (and many hundreds more, now extinct) onto the ark. Could this even be possible considering the number of animals and the size of the ark? (see Genesis 6)

A cubit is about 18 inches long ... so the ark would have been about 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. The total volume would have been about 1.5 million cubic feet. (I have seen measurements which claim this ark was configured in relation to the temple...)

Anyway, a squirrel or rabbit would need about 3 cubic feet -- an elephant about 1400 cubic ft. A turkey 9 cubic feet, a lion 120 and a giraffe, 900 cubic feet. We could justly figure about 10 cubic feet per animal on average --- this does not count the insects or any space for stalls or cages or containers.

We also have to consider food for the animals which God told Noah to bring on the Ark (Genesis 6:21). Since the ark was "home" to everyone for over a year, there would have to be storage space for food for everyone. The average person eats about 1300 pounds of food a year (about 7 times his weight) An elephant eats about 60,000 lbs. of food a year which is 7 to 8 times its weight. An ox or cow (clean animals BTW) can consume about 24,000 lbs of hay a year. A wolf can eat a sheep a week or 52 per year - 20 times its weight and a lion 35 times its weight. (well, the list goes on... but you get the idea)

With only 1.2 million cubic feet available on the ark, it appears Noah would have needed at least 43 arks to accomplish the job of storing all the animals and their required food. AND we have not considered all the vegetation and water for drinking and bathing.

We must also consider the impossible task of Noah gathering every species of plant and animal on the planet and then somehow, redistributing them back to their original habitat. Many animals require specific climate and habitat in which to live. How would Noah have provided this on the ark? I'm also not going to put you through the considerations of the monumental task of just 8 people tending to keeping this many animals, clean, groomed and exercised! Nor will we consider what might have been done with the waste products of these animals.

In all fairness to those who believe in a global flood, in was not necessary for Noah to gather the animals, because God could have brought all of them to him. To fit all the animals on the boat, the animals could have been all small or new borns, and not necessarily full grown animals. This way, the amount of food necessary to feed them would have been a lot less. It is also possible that, if there was a global flood, God could have caused a deep sleep to fall on these animals (many animals do go into hybernation), which would have helped Noah and his family greatly in tending these animals.

Then too, there is the problem of the salt water and the fresh water mixing. This would kill off the various species of marine life. It would also wipe out all of the trees and seeds of other vegetation as well. If the tops of the highest mountains (about 29,000 feet) were covered, this means the water level would have been five miles above the present sea level. The water pressure would have been about 800 tons per square inch. Ten months of this pressure, along with the lack of light and mixture of salt water would have destroyed all plant life and seeds on the planet. The entire life cycle, which depends upon plants would have ended. Still, the animals released obviously found vegetation to eat.

If the whole planet was covered with water, how did it drain away or evaporate in 164 days? This could not have taken place in 100 years.

The Bible is regarded as infallible and the fundamentalists believe it must be read in a literal context. This is done out of a misguided reverence for the Bible. There are many types and shadows throughout the Bible which revolve around certain words. Water, ark, saved, world, fire, etc. Many of these symbolic words can be found in Genesis, Daniel, Revelation and many of the prophecies.

We must also remember what we have is not the original word of God... but copies, versions and translations of the original words from God. Translations and copies of the Bible by men are not infallible. The Bible does contain poor or even wrong translations, some were by accident while some were intentional. Can these mis-translations be read at "face value?" To do so may render an understanding which may be in conflict with science, history, or the Bible itself.

The Map of History​



The Flood of Genesis was a true historical event. According to historians, and Bible scholars, the date was from November in the year 2345 to November 2344 BC. These dates fall smack in the middle of the period in history known as the BRONZE AGE. (3000 BC to 1200 BC) This was a significant period in history. The technology to forge bronze increased trade routes, necessitated the domestication of draft horses, the invention of bellows, ox carts, potters wheels, as well as the invention of the plow for cultivating the soil. These were great advances. If there had been a global flood, it would have set civilization back to the Stone Age and it would have taken centuries to recover what was lost.

Written records dating from this time are, of course, not too plentiful. But one cannot deny the existence of archeological evidence that many great civilizations existed in various parts of the world at the time of the Flood and continued through it. If Noah's flood had been universal, all civilizations would have been destroyed along with their inventions, language, art and whatever other advancement each unique civilization would have made. History does not reveal gaps or a large void in any of these cultures which would be the natural result of a catastrophic event such as a global flood.

Earliest written records of an advanced civilization are those of the Sumerians in Mesopotamia. Their King Lists date to about 3350 BC. This shows an ongoing civilization well through the period of the flood.

Egypt's history shows no record of a sudden, complete disruption by a great deluge. The pyramids and other monuments erected there before the time of the flood would surely have been destroyed (or at the very least) badly damaged by a universal flood.

China's civilization experienced a prosperous period during the Yao Dynasty (between 2400 - 2200) with no record of a cataclysmic interruption.

The Minoan civilization on the island of Crete entered a cycle of cultural advancement about 2500 BC. These people had already produced works of art, established cities, had an alphabet and made use of bronze prior to the date of the Flood. It continued to develop and was established as a center of trade until is was destroyed by a volcano in 1470 BC. Though this civilization was based on and island, there was no evidence of a flood in written or archeological evidence.

The civilization of the Indus Valley was a thriving state in 2500 BC. It boasted of two great cities harappa and Mohenjo-Daro. This civilization rivaled that of Egypt and Mesopotamia and continued to exist uninterrupted until 1500 BC.

More evidence is found in Phoenicia. This was a thriving trade center which existed before, during and after the flood.

These along with other groups, the Japanese, the American Indians, and the Negro tribes of Africa, all survived the period of the Flood. There is no evidence that any of these millions of people suddenly disappeared from history and then suddenly re-appeared all over the world carrying the same culture, art, language, writing and architectural designs -- unique to each civilization.

The real tragedy is, when fundamentalists try to make history conform to their false notions about the Bible, it makes both them and God's Word seem foolish and unrealistic.

This is the last part of what I had planned for proof of a local flood. There are other proofs in archeology and evidence of racial types progressing through this period without interruption.

The Bible tells us that Adam and Eve were cast out of the garden to the East. Genesis 3:24, "So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."

This land East of Eden was to become Adam's new home. Since we learned in the first part of this study that the flood occurred in #127 Adamah, we can assume this land East of Eden was the general location of the flood.

It is a popular opinion that Eden was located near the Tigris-Euphrates river in a place now called Mesopotamia. However, at the time Moses would have written these words, this land (then called Shinar) was as well known and populated as the land of Egypt. He would have logically referred to it as the land of Shinar. Because this is how Moses referred to it in other places in the Bible i.e. (Genesis 10:10, 11:2, 14,1 14:9, and 24:10) This area was well known to Moses by it's familiar name.

According to L.A. Waddell, in his book "The Makers of Civilization, the inhabitants of Mesopotamia understood (even before the time of Moses) that Eden had been located East of their land.

Reading further in the Genesis account, we find other clues as to the exact location of Adam's land. There was a river with 4 heads. In Genesis 2:10, the account goes on to name the four rivers; Pison, Gihon, Hiddekel, and Euphrates.

Frederick Haberman "Tracing Our Ancestors" considers the plateau of Pamir to be the original Eden. He believes this was the homeland of Adam's descendants up until the time of the Flood. Today this area is known as the Tarim Basin or Eastern Turkestan.

This region is surrounded by a ridge of very high mountains forming a gigantic basin in the midst of them. It measures 1,000 long and is about 350 miles wide. From the lakes of this plateau come four great rivers: the Indus, the Jaxartes, the Oxus, and the Tarim. The Oxus is still called by the natives the Digihun or Gihon; the Chitral branch of the Indus answers the description of the Pison; the Jxartes is the original Euphrates and the Tarim going toward the east is in all probability, the Hiddekl. It was a flood of gigantic proportions which brought judgment upon all that were in this land. It may have been "local" but it was my no means minimal.


Conclusion​

If the flood was local, it would explain how, only 292 years after the flood, at the birth of Abraham, Egypt was a great nation. It would also explain how there were many other nations, such as the "The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites" (Genesis 15:19-21).


http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/flood.html
 
Upvote 0

Papias

Listening to TW4
Dec 22, 2005
3,967
985
58
✟57,276.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Kind is all that matters. Species is a scientific term invented by man.
.


But if we stick to a literal reading, then "kind" is defined as below a species by Lev. 19:19. Thus, the ark would have needed to have literally over a million pairs of animals if it's not an illustrative, non-historical, parable.

The point is that God saved 7 clean pairs of animals and 2 unclean pairs of animals and 8 exemplary humans from utter destruction. From these souls His chosen ones were extenuated.

Which never happened according to many different lines of evidence. For instance, that would have left a clear genetic bottleneck in all species, and we don't see that. That also would have resulted in a radial distribution pattern of species, again which we don't see. Unless you are one of those creationists who says that the marsupials got to Australia by being blasted there by volcanoes........ etc.

The flood story simply can't be a literal, global flood, any more than a literal story that the moon was destroyed last month could be true. It simply doesn't match the real world we see today. That's why the insistence on the literal truth of Noah's flood hurts our Christian witness, by making Christianity seem delusional.

In Jesus' name-

Papias
 
Upvote 0

Crowns&Laurels

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
2,769
751
✟6,832.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Proof for the Great Flood is fantastically evident. There are oceanic fossils on mountains, and fossil fuels at the bottom of the ocean due to the extreme pressure of water.
The denial of the Flood is based on presuppositions- believing that the world is billions of years old before the fact.
 
Upvote 0

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟24,020.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP
The denial of the Flood is based on presuppositions- believing that the world is billions of years old before the fact.

Actually, it's the other way around. The geologists of the 17th to 19th centuries began with the presupposition of a global flood and set out to find which geological strata were laid down by the flood. What they found was that in reality, not a single one could have been laid down by a single global flood. You might check out this summary of how the idea of a global flood died among scientists nearly 200 years ago. Even better, get the book it is based on. http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/p82.htm (The author is a Christian.)

PS The realization that the earth is billions of years old did not come about until the 20th century so none of those early geologists used that presupposition. The facts came first, then the conclusions.

PPS The scientist who put the final nail in the coffin of a global deluge was a strong opponent of Darwin. His name was Louis Agassiz and as a professor at Harvard he fought hard to keep Darwin's ideas out of the science curriculum in the 19th century. But his work on glaciation showed that ice rather than water caused some features attributed to the flood.
 
Upvote 0

Crowns&Laurels

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
2,769
751
✟6,832.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Actually, it's the other way around. The geologists of the 17th to 19th centuries began with the presupposition of a global flood and set out to find which geological strata were laid down by the flood. What they found was that in reality, not a single one could have been laid down by a single global flood. You might check out this summary of how the idea of a global flood died among scientists nearly 200 years ago. Even better, get the book it is based on. http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/p82.htm (The author is a Christian.)

PS The realization that the earth is billions of years old did not come about until the 20th century so none of those early geologists used that presupposition. The facts came first, then the conclusions.

PPS The scientist who put the final nail in the coffin of a global deluge was a strong opponent of Darwin. His name was Louis Agassiz and as a professor at Harvard he fought hard to keep Darwin's ideas out of the science curriculum in the 19th century. But his work on glaciation showed that ice rather than water caused some features attributed to the flood.

It's interesting that you would be bring Darwin, though I suppose it's expected- his theory on the finches were dead wrong. That is, his ideology was flawed from the start. The finches were simply exchanging locations..

I believe that the universe is ancient, but that life did not come around until God created it. Entropy is in my corner on this, as well as the chaos theory, the laws of thermodynamics, and most importantly, the sacred word of the Creator.

Presuppositions, my friend. How could they possibly deduce what they proposed if not being based on utter presuppositions?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟24,020.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP
It's interesting that you would be bring Darwin, though I suppose it's expected- his theory on the finches were dead wrong. That is, his ideology was flawed from the start. The finches were simply exchanging locations..

I believe that the universe is ancient, but that life did not come around until God created it. Entropy is in my corner on this, as well as the chaos theory, the laws of thermodynamics, and most importantly, the sacred word of the Creator.

Presuppositions, my friend. How could they possibly deduce what they proposed if not being based on utter presuppositions?

Darwin did not have a theory on the finches. In fact, he didn't even identify them all as finches--he thought some were warblers and some were larks until the specimens he sent back to England were examined by an ornithologist.

Darwin's biological specialities were beetles and barnacles, not birds. And what about the Galapagos tortoises? It was the locals who told Darwin that you could tell which island a tortoise came from by its distinctive shell. Darwin did not pre-suppose that.

And once his ornithologist friend told him all of his Galapagos birds were finches, Darwin regretted that he had not kept track of which island they came from. He couldn't provide evidence for any theory about them. So how could his theory be dead wrong?

If the finches were merely exchanging locations during his stay, why did they not do so during the much longer (30 years) and more detailed study by the Grants? They banded over 2,000 birds and kept track of each individual and its offspring. I think they would notice some exchanging of locations.

This is the problem with cherry-picking evidence; there is always something you haven't thought about. Better to get to know the field first.

So, how did Christian geologists in the 1800s come up with pre-suppositions to deduce an ancient earth and why did they continue to try and prove a global flood up into the early 19th century if they had such presuppositions?

They did not deduce an ancient earth with no global flood from presuppositions, but from actual field studies in geology. You want to know how they could do that without prior anti-bibical presuppositions? Read a good history on the work of those geologists. Look at what they discovered that did not make sense of a global flood and did make sense of an ancient earth---though even they underestimated just how ancient.

BTW, I agree that life did not come to be until God created it. The evidence is that he did so about 4 billion years ago. And you betray ignorance if you think entropy, chaos theory or thermodynamics is contrary to the evidence. As for setting the bible against science, it is a theology of straw that supports such an approach.
 
Upvote 0

Crowns&Laurels

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
2,769
751
✟6,832.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You'd have to win the lottery five times over to have created life out of it's own physical accord. Even by the mind bending size of the universe, these are odds that still go against logic.

The Fermis Paradox is the phenomenon in which, by scientific decree, the Milky Way alone should have over 70 civilizations. Yet, we have not seen a single one. Space is completely sterile as far as what we've seen.
Do you know what that really supposes? It supposes that there is something flawed in science- that we have likely gotten something very wrong.

By the way, the very fact that Darwin couldn't even correctly identify the birds he studied is cause for marking him as a dubious scientist in the first place_
 
  • Like
Reactions: topcare
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,406
60
✟92,791.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Here an atheist/agnostic/non-believer calculated the math surrounding Noah, his ark, and a global flood, here is his results:


Another thing, how did 8 people manage to feed one million plus or even hundreds of thousands of animals over the course of a year, some animals require hundreds of pounds of nutrition everyday.

How could largest zoo the world has ever seen, set in a giant ship floating on a flooded earth, be maintained by a miniscule staff of eight? Image the work that would be required daily? Would they need to work 16 hour shifts... 20 hour shifts daily? They would be dead on their feet every day.

When the OT books were being rewritten in Babylon the Hebrew writers desired to trace their bloodlines back to Adam and Eve who incarnate on a populated earth. The audience was the child like mind of Bronze Age sheep herders. Being unable to do so they decided to drown the whole world in its own wickedness to fill the gap.
They didn't claim to be writing the word of God, and they didn't realize that one day intelligent men would see the story as the a silly myth.
 
Upvote 0

Crowns&Laurels

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
2,769
751
✟6,832.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Of course, you can pretty much count out all sea life, which is the majority of all the species on Earth. I don't suppose Noah had glass tanks to put them in.

The point is that there is ~literal~, and there's just ~stupid~.. the Flood account was what it was. There's no need to make rocket science out of it, evolutionists are just too obsessed with the theory to accept anything contrary to it. An insanity due to scientific presupposition; they'd rip the Bible in half before their science books.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

random person

1 COR. 10:11; HEB. 1:2; HEB. 9:26,28; 1 PET. 1:20
Dec 10, 2013
3,646
262
Riverside California
✟14,087.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Of course, you can pretty much count out all sea life, which is the majority of all the species on Earth. I don't suppose Noah had glass tanks to put them in.

The point is that there is ~literal~, and there's just ~stupid~.. the Flood account was what it was. There's no need to make rocket science out of it, evolutionists are just too obsessed with the theory to accept anything contrary to it. An insanity due to scientific presupposition; they'd rip the Bible in half before their science books.


Then why are Creationists challenging science and attempting to make a rocket science out of their theology?
 
Upvote 0