Dismiss Notice

Welcome to Christian Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
  • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
  • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting after you have posted 20 posts and have received 5 likes.
  • Access to private conversations with other members.

We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Geologic Evidences for the Genesis Flood

Discussion in 'Creationism' started by FallingWaters, Dec 29, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. FallingWaters

    FallingWaters Woman of God

    Messages:
    8,090
    Likes Received:
    69
    Marital Status:
    Widow/Widower
    Faith:
    Christian
    "Why is it that many people, including many Christians, can’t see the geologic evidence for the Genesis Flood? It is usually because they have bought into the evolutionary idea that “the present is the key to the past.” They are convinced that, because today’s geological processes are so slow, the rock strata and the earth’s rock layers took millions of years to form."

    Geologic Evidences for the Genesis Flood

    Evidence #1—Fossils of sea creatures high above sea level due to the ocean waters having flooded over the continents.

    Evidence #2—Rapid burial of plants and animals.

    Evidence #3—Rapidly deposited sediment layers spread across vast areas.

    Evidence #4—Sediment transported long distances.

    Evidence #5—Rapid or no erosion between strata.

    Evidence #6—Many strata laid down in rapid succession.

     
    mindlight and JesusFreak78 like this.
  2. MatthewDiscipleofGod

    MatthewDiscipleofGod Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    2,991
    Likes Received:
    56
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Others
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Some will believe what they want to believe. Evidence for a global flood is outstanding. I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I hear an evolutionist claim there is no evidence for a global flood. Some people are either just really bind to reality or just have been lying to themselves for so long they are starting to believe themselves. Geology was one of the starting key areas of the modern creation movement. Because of that there has been more and more evidence piled up over the decades from well educated and intelligent geologists.
     
    mindlight likes this.
  3. Sunrise78

    Sunrise78 Member

    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Politics:
    US-Republican
    Faith:
    Non-Denominational
    I think many do not believe in a global flood because they interpret the evidence through a uniformitarian lens - i.e. the idea that geological processes happened in the past at the same rate as they normally happen now without considering any catastrophic events.

    When one looks at the evidence and asks, "What would we expect to find if there really was a global flood?" the answer is pretty much the evidence that we see. For someone to say "there's no evidence of a global flood because it takes millions of years for all these rock layers to be deposited" begs the question because the idea that such processes take millions of years in the first place is based on the incorrect assumption that geological processes in the past were the same as they are now.
     
    mindlight and FallingWaters like this.
  4. Calminian

    Calminian Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    5,949
    Likes Received:
    49
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Republican
    Faith:
    Christian
    Or acts of God! (literally, not in the modern vernacular)
     
  5. Sunrise78

    Sunrise78 Member

    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Politics:
    US-Republican
    Faith:
    Non-Denominational
    Exactly - the Flood as an act of God was definitely catastrophic!
     
  6. Calminian

    Calminian Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    5,949
    Likes Received:
    49
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Republican
    Faith:
    Christian
    So help me out here, fish. What do you guys think about marine fossils in high mountains? What's the standard naturalistic explanation for this?
     
  7. ClearSky

    ClearSky New Member

    Messages:
    143
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Christian

    The reason why the geologic evidence for the Flood is not seen by geologists and many Christians is not uniformatism. Geology also believes in great catastrophes in the past, like continent shifting, land rising out of the sea and so on. Thats how geologists explain marine fossils on mountains. There are websites - though I won't post them here - where you can look up Geology and geologic explanations for all the phenomena you mentioned.

    No, the reason is much simpler. It's because God removed all the clear evidence that would undoubtedly prove the flood. He only left evidence that could be interpreted in different ways, with or without flood.

    He even changed evidence, for instance he gave the different sediment layers in the Grand Canyon different magnetic orientations. This way He suggested that they were deposited during a long time period in which the earth magnetic field changed several times.

    Now, you will ask - why did God do that? Why did he give geologists the opportunity to interpret the earth history in a different way without the Genesis Flood?

    It's because he wants us to believe, not to know. Belief is based on a personal decision. If we had all sorts of evidence proving supernatural events, we wouldn't have this choice anymore.
    We were force to believe, but God wants our belief be based not of force but on free will and on a personal choice.
     
  8. busterdog

    busterdog Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Christian
    There is a hidden element of uniformitarianism here. One assumes that strata were simply buried where they flourished.

    The evidence does not require that conclusion.

    Turbulence accounts for multiple strata after organisms have been moved from their point of origin. The nature of the uplift of the Himalayas is evidence that there was a signficant amount of moving going on. SOme of it water, some of it earth, some of it sediments.
     
  9. busterdog

    busterdog Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Christian
    I am really uncomfortable with this line of reasoning.

    Or at least the way it is stated.

    It is defensible, but it is too easily abused by the prosecution (evolutionists). The practice here is to pillory people when the opportunity presents itself and not to take the time to find a way to assume the best of someone making a post like yours. I am not being critical. I am just a veteran of dealing with evolutionists and what they do with posts like yours.

    Clearly, when God acts, there are multiple reasons that can be ascribed.

    God creates satan for a number of reasons (or consequences):

    1. as worship leader
    2. to be exceedingly beautiful
    3. to afflict Job with boils
    4. to harden Pharaoh's heart
    5. to deceive the nations

    Similarly, God created a huge mess known as the flood. In destroying the old world, a lot of evidence went by the wayside. The announced purpose was to cleanse the earth, not muddle the evidence. But, as you suggest, it certainly had that effect.

    Because you stated things as you did, it seemed to me that people would charge you with ignoring the complexity of the situation. That would be unfair and your post wouldn't require it.

    It does seem clear to me that there is evidence for both used in the geologic column. I don't think you excluded that view. That would follow from the mere fact of the catastrophe in view. Whether one conclusion should be preferred from looking at all the evidence is a different question and one that we focus on human prejudice, not just the evidence.

    One day, when all the evidence is in, only one conclusion will be supported by all of the evidence. The reason why humans made the wrong decision about it will have something to do with their prejudice, not that the evidence was impossible to discern. I assume you are not saying that God made it impossible to discern the nature of the flood from the evidence.

    If you look at the story of Exodus, both types of causes and effects are in evidence. Pharoah clearly hardened his own heart by unbelief and rebellion. God also hardens his heart. Pharaoh's enchanters, conduits for satan, help him along.

    [​IMG]Exd 7:3 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt.
    [​IMG]Exd 14:4 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, that he shall follow after them; and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the Egyptians may know that I [am] the LORD. And they did so.[​IMG]Exd 7:3 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt. [​IMG]Exd 14:4 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, that he shall follow after them; and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the Egyptians may know that I [am] the LORD. And they did so.
    So, this supports your post.

    The old christianforums canard is that an honest, credible God would never give nature the appearance of a lie. This is stupid, since all the evolutionists here say that the old testament factually describes a flat earth. Or in other words, God would deceive lots of people in the past, but not evolutionist, because they are special.

    However, it is quite clear that evaluation of the evidence represents three types of things: 1. where your heart is, there will your treasure be also; 2. God has hidden the truth from the wise and revealed unto babes; and 3. satan has been released to deceive the nations and snatch away the Word of God.

    Of course, God could just speak the truth by trumpets from heaven. But, He has not. Why not? Your post suggests an answer.
     
    mindlight and FallingWaters like this.
  10. Calminian

    Calminian Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    5,949
    Likes Received:
    49
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Republican
    Faith:
    Christian
    Actually you're assuming Everest was 29,000 tall at the time of the flood. Virtually all creationists deny this. They believe the amount of water on earth during the flood was about the same we have today, but landscape—the valleys and mountains were totally different. In fact I would think that even you would believe this, being how there are marine fossils in mountains. Surely you believe these mountains were once at very different heights than they are now?

    Now God could have supernaturally added some water during the Flood, but His dealings with mountains is somewhat of a theme in scripture.

    Job 9:5 He removes the mountains, and they do not know When He overturns them in His anger;

    Job 28:9 He puts his hand on the flint; He overturns the mountains at the roots.

    Psa. 46:2 Therefore we will not fear, Even though the earth be removed, And though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea; 3 Though its waters roar and be troubled, Though the mountains shake with its swelling. Selah

    Psa. 65:6 Who established the mountains by His strength, Being clothed with power;

    Psa. 104:6 You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters stood above the mountains.


    According to the Bible He has no problem rearranging the earthscape. Remember, God's intention for the Flood was to destroy all life. His intention to save a remnant was a totally different task.

    Here's an interesting article about air pressure that might be relevant. Did Noah need oxygen above the mountains?
     
  11. Calminian

    Calminian Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    5,949
    Likes Received:
    49
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Republican
    Faith:
    Christian


    Hmmm, unfortunately I see a jump from the natural pot to the supernatural frying pan. Kind of reminds me of those that used to say, God created dinosaur fossils to confuse unbelievers.

    You may be solving some logical problems by asserting this, but causing all kinds of bigger theological problems. Biblically, this isn't in accord with God's character. Nowhere in scripture do we see anything like this. When God does blind unbelievers, after much stubbornness on their part, He never does it through planting false evidence, etc.. He will sometimes speak in parables in which revelation is not fully disclosed, until a change in heart occurs an one seeks (All of Christ's parables are explained in scripture). Or He will give over men to their rebellion, blinding them to what is true. But planting false evidence? This is a theological can of worms I would urge you not to open. Furthermore, it's totally unnecessary.

    And yet he forgot to remove all the marine fossils from mountains. :doh: Wow, there's a serious flaw in theology here, somewhere, that would even allow for such a theory.

    Bingo! I found it. Unfortunately, it's clear now you don't understand the biblical definition of faith. Faith in the modern vernacular has come to mean "belief apart from evidence." Or as Mark Twain put it, "Faith is believing what you know ain't so." The problem is, this was never the understanding the Biblical writers had. I see this so often, it's not funny. People often conflate ancient words with modern ones, not realizing there can be subtle differences. Faith, in biblical terms, was simply trust, and was only as valuable as the one in whom it was placed. Trusting in something you had no evidence for, is very foolish according to the Biblical writers. They didn't want us to go after every wind of doctrine. This is why they were constantly urging us to examine and test what is being said. Here's a great article that should completely transform your understanding of this Biblical term.

    Fallacious Faith
    Correcting an All-too-Common Misconception

    James Patrick Holding
     
    FallingWaters likes this.
  12. FallingWaters

    FallingWaters Woman of God

    Messages:
    8,090
    Likes Received:
    69
    Marital Status:
    Widow/Widower
    Faith:
    Christian
    Aren't those considered debating posts?
    Only posts which support Creationism are allowed in this forum.
     
  13. FallingWaters

    FallingWaters Woman of God

    Messages:
    8,090
    Likes Received:
    69
    Marital Status:
    Widow/Widower
    Faith:
    Christian
  14. Calminian

    Calminian Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    5,949
    Likes Received:
    49
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Republican
    Faith:
    Christian
    Actually, it's my fault. I initiated by asking them questions. :( :sorry:
     
  15. Calminian

    Calminian Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    5,949
    Likes Received:
    49
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Republican
    Faith:
    Christian
    Sorry, got too many threads on my plate as it is.
     
  16. FallingWaters

    FallingWaters Woman of God

    Messages:
    8,090
    Likes Received:
    69
    Marital Status:
    Widow/Widower
    Faith:
    Christian
    Creationism Forum Rules

    Creationism

    A subforum for Creationists to share research, resources, ideas and theories on how God created the world without using evolution as His tool. The Creationism subforum is a place for fellowship and discussions related to non-evolutionary creationism.

    Non-Creationists, Evolutionist, Theist Evolutionist posting is restricted to fellowship posts only.

    I daresay, your post was not a fellowship post.

    It was the intent of your post to tell we creationists that what we believe about how corals got on the mountains is wrong. That is not fellowship.

    Fellowship-
      1. The condition of sharing similar interests, ideals, or experiences, as by reason of profession, religion, or nationality.
      2. The companionship of individuals in a congenial atmosphere and on equal terms.
    congenial -

    Of a pleasant disposition; friendly and sociable
     
  17. Calminian

    Calminian Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    5,949
    Likes Received:
    49
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Republican
    Faith:
    Christian
    Honestly, I think I'm the one that needs the slap on the hand. I asked them direct questions. To tell you the truth, I thought they were allowed to debate here. I thought that's what we were petitioning to end.
     
  18. FallingWaters

    FallingWaters Woman of God

    Messages:
    8,090
    Likes Received:
    69
    Marital Status:
    Widow/Widower
    Faith:
    Christian
    I wasn't going to say anything else but he insisted he wasn't debating or arguing.

    The discussion of late hate been that it was desired non-creationists would not be allowed to post in here at all because historically, the line is always getting crossed.

    But that's not an option unless the owner of the board were to allow it.
     
  19. Calminian

    Calminian Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    5,949
    Likes Received:
    49
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Republican
    Faith:
    Christian
    Ah. I see. Thanks for the clarification.
     
  20. Gwenyfur

    Gwenyfur Legend

    Messages:
    18,545
    Likes Received:
    350
    Marital Status:
    In Relationship
    Politics:
    US-Constitution
    Faith:
    Pagan
    For all the intellect we have in this thread...
    we apparently have several who don't understand the rules of the Creationism sub forum...
    so here you go

    Read Carefully:

    1. You must be a member of the Creationism subforum to debate in this subforum.



    2. You must be registered as a creationist within your profile to be a member of this subforum. If your posts are not in accordance with your profile, then your posts may be reported and removed.




    3. Non-Creationists, Evolutionist, Theist Evolutionist posting is restricted to fellowship posts only. No criticisms of Creationism, creationists, or organizations of creationists will be allowed in this subforum.




    Are we Crystal?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...