Global vs Local Flood: Perhaps there is a way to have Unison Between the Two

[Gxg (G²)]

Interesting..

 

[Aman777]

Originally Posted by Aman777

freeze:>>Where is physical proof of the Biblical flood?

Dear Freeze, It's within your own body. >>>BIg Snip<<<

Freeze:>>I was talking about geological evidence,such as wikipedia.org/wiki/Scablands not my DNA

Dear Freeze, Isaiah tells us the first world was "clean dissolved in the flood. Isaiah 24:19

Our earth has NEVER suffered a Global flood. It was the first world which was totally destroyed in the flood. Our earth is still here. The earth of Adam, which was made on the 3rd Day, is gone forever. Our earth is scheduled to be burned. ll Peter 3:10 That is why God made the third heaven.
​

 

[Gxg (G²)]

God is faithful...

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

This website is by a geologist and Old Earth creationist&#8230;

http://thestonescryout.com/home


The idea is that the flood was a local event, and wiped out the human population, because they were concentrated in one area; probably the flood plain of Iraq. I don&#8217;t go along with that, as there is evidence of an ancient world-wide civilisation, which created megalithic structures. Although it seems that you never get fossils of dinosaurs and mammals in the same deposit? You get fish in one deposit, dinosaurs in another etc. If it was as YECs say, then you&#8217;d have them all jumbled up together. So I am tending to go with Old Earth geology now, as I can&#8217;t see how everyone has got geology wrong and Ken Ham has got it right. There were probably various floods going on in different ages. I don&#8217;t see any evidence for evolution, and so there must have been creation at different times, is that progressive creation? I don&#8217;t accept the two creation accounts in Genesis any more. And it looks like the flood account in the bible has been lifted from the Epic of Gilgamesh, which might go back to a real flood that occurred locally in Sumer or that region.

 

[KWCrazy]

The idea is that the flood was a local event, and wiped out the human population, because they were concentrated in one area; probably the flood plain of Iraq. I don’t go along with that, as there is evidence of an ancient world-wide civilisation, which created megalithic structures.

Aside from being in direct contradiction to the word of God, the biggest problem with a local flood id that it's impossible given the terrain. There isn't any place in the Middle East that doesn't have runoff to the sea. You can't have a catastrophic flood with waters that cover the tips of a mountain so long as you have an open access for the water to run off. For the flood to happen, sea level had to rise equally as high, which means a global flood.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

Aside from being in direct contradiction to the word of God, the biggest problem with a local flood id that it's impossible given the terrain. There isn't any place in the Middle East that doesn't have runoff to the sea. You can't have a catastrophic flood with waters that cover the tips of a mountain so long as you have an open access for the water to run off. For the flood to happen, sea level had to rise equally as high, which means a global flood.

isn't there evidence of a flood of Ur?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

This website is by a geologist and Old Earth creationist…

The Stones Cry Out - Geology and the Bible:            Updated January 11, 2013


The idea is that the flood was a local event, and wiped out the human population, because they were concentrated in one area; probably the flood plain of Iraq..

Was there anything from the resource you linked to that really stood out to you?

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

Was there anything from the resource you linked to that really stood out to you?

1. Geologists can be trained to predict where to find oil and coal.
2. Dinosaur fossil beds are not mixed up with mammal fossils, they are always separate.
3. The Pyrenees mountain range, as the result of tectonic plates moving together slowly.
4. Fossils not being distributed evenly around the globe

also, there is a good argument that Behemoth is a hippo, and not a saurapod dinosaur, as it says in the Job text that the Behemoth has water coming up to its mouth, and hippos were present in the Jordan river back in the time of Job
I don't know when the dinosaurs lived, there is evidence that some survived into the Middle Ages, the clue might be in the carbon dating of coal..
The site below is interesting; they found a carbon date of 10-16,000 years for dinosaur bones. The dating of coal is inconclusive; 40-60,000 years old, but maybe older, due to contamination.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=307

 

[freezerman2000]

Aside from being in direct contradiction to the word of God, the biggest problem with a local flood id that it's impossible given the terrain. There isn't any place in the Middle East that doesn't have runoff to the sea. You can't have a catastrophic flood with waters that cover the tips of a mountain so long as you have an open access for the water to run off. For the flood to happen, sea level had to rise equally as high, which means a global flood.

Before the Black Sea flood, the area was one HUGE depression..no run off into ANY ocean. PBS - Scientific American Frontiers | Beneath the Sea | Noah's Flood

 

[KWCrazy]

Before the Black Sea flood, the area was one HUGE depression..no run off into ANY ocean.

No it wasn't. "Ryan and Pitman suggest the Black Sea was once a much smaller, land-locked freshwater lake, fed by ancient rivers, and surrounded by fertile plains. Neolithic people, Ryan and Pitman suppose, would have flocked to farm these Eden-like plains to farm them while supplementing their diets with the lake's abundant shellfish."

I don't see any evidence of a major difference in topography being proved, nor do I see evidence of mountains in this make believe low lying area. Since the water came 15 cubits over the peaks of mountains, there had to be mountains. Moreover, if such were the case Noah could have easily walked his family outof the region over the 100 year time that it took to create the ark. No need to build an ark when an oxcart would do.

People need to disbelieve the global flood, which Jesus spoke of, in order to buoy their belief in the nonsense of evolution. If you don't want to believe the Bible then don't believe it. I do wish people would stop misrepresenting it, though.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Before the Black Sea flood, the area was one HUGE depression..no run off into ANY ocean. PBS - Scientific American Frontiers | Beneath the Sea | Noah's Flood

Intresting article and thanks for sharing it

 

[Aman777]

KW:>>I don't see any evidence of a major difference in topography being proved, nor do I see evidence of mountains in this make believe low lying area. Since the water came 15 cubits over the peaks of mountains, there had to be mountains.

Dear KW, The topography of the area has NOthing to do with Noah, since he did not live in the area.

KW:>>Moreover, if such were the case Noah could have easily walked his family outof the region over the 100 year time that it took to create the ark. No need to build an ark when an oxcart would do.

Noah arrived in the area from the first earth which was totally destroyed in the Flood.

KW:>>People need to disbelieve the global flood, which Jesus spoke of, in order to buoy their belief in the nonsense of evolution. If you don't want to believe the Bible then don't believe it. I do wish people would stop misrepresenting it, though.

The Ark was above the highest mountains of the first earth AND upon the mountains of Ararat on the SAME 150th Day after the flood began. Read the last verse in Genesis 7 and the first verses of Genesis 8. The problem is that people fail to see that the Bible is true, but not according to the ancient, traditional, theories of people who could NOT understand Genesis.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Calminian]

...

People need to disbelieve the global flood, which Jesus spoke of, in order to buoy their belief in the nonsense of evolution. If you don't want to believe the Bible then don't believe it. I do wish people would stop misrepresenting it, though.

Boy ain't the truth. In Genesis we find the father of our faith, Abraham, and yet how little does the modern church resemble him? He had faith to leave a very secure estate and journey to a hostile land for the sake of a child not yet conceived, with his wife well beyond childbearing years. He and even had faith to sacrifice Isaac after he was born, trusting God had a deeper plan he couldn't understand. Yet we stumble over a Flood? And we don't believe Genesis 1 because it conflicts with naturalistic theories?

 

[Fascinated With God]

Before the Black Sea flood, the area was one HUGE depression..no run off into ANY ocean. PBS - Scientific American Frontiers | Beneath the Sea | Noah's Flood

This is consistent with the "flood weapon" of Gilgamesh rather than the diluvian flood. That is a separate prehistoric legend which is corroborated by archeological evidence.

 

[Fascinated With God]

Boy ain't the truth. In Genesis we find the father of our faith, Abraham, and yet how little does the modern church resemble him? He had faith to leave a very secure estate and journey to a hostile land for the sake of a child not yet conceived, with his wife well beyond childbearing years. He and even had faith to sacrifice Isaac after he was born, trusting God had a deeper plan he couldn't understand.

Meeting the Angel of the Lord, i.e. God in person is a luxury that none of us have, so an adequate comparison is hard to make.

Yet we stumble over a Flood?

Who stumbles over the flood? Long before geologists started finding evidence for the Flood, ethnographers noticed the universality of flood myths in all cultures. So you have to go back a very long time to find anyone stumbling over the Flood.

And we don't believe Genesis 1 because it conflicts with naturalistic theories?

Spiritual interpretations rather than materialistic interpretations hardly constitute disbelief. Quite the other way around.

 

[Greg1234]

This is consistent with the "flood weapon" of Gilgamesh rather than the diluvian flood. That is a separate prehistoric legend which is corroborated by archeological evidence.

Categorically, every flood event is a flood myth since since no activity here is existent without the spirit. But what are your reasons for randomly substituting one event for another?

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

This thread has been cleaned up.
Please discuss the OP and knock off the flaming.
Thanks

 

[Gxg (G²)]

In Genesis we find the father of our faith, Abraham, and yet how little does the modern church resemble him? He had faith to leave a very secure estate and journey to a hostile land for the sake of a child not yet conceived, with his wife well beyond childbearing years. He and even had faith to sacrifice Isaac after he was born, trusting God had a deeper plan he couldn't understand. Yet we stumble over a Flood? And we don't believe Genesis 1 because it conflicts with naturalistic theories?

Good points..

 

[SkyWriting]

No it wasn't. "Ryan and Pitman suggest the Black Sea was once a much smaller, land-locked freshwater lake, fed by ancient rivers, and surrounded by fertile plains. Neolithic people, Ryan and Pitman suppose, would have flocked to farm these Eden-like plains to farm them while supplementing their diets with the lake's abundant shellfish."

I don't see any evidence of a major difference in topography being proved, nor do I see evidence of mountains in this make believe low lying area. Since the water came 15 cubits over the peaks of mountains, there had to be mountains. Moreover, if such were the case Noah could have easily walked his family outof the region over the 100 year time that it took to create the ark. No need to build an ark when an oxcart would do.

People need to disbelieve the global flood, which Jesus spoke of, in order to buoy their belief in the nonsense of evolution. If you don't want to believe the Bible then don't believe it. I do wish people would stop misrepresenting it, though.

I've come to believe that the scriptures are 100% accurate and I don't worry about the parts
that seem to conflict with a scientist views. Science is pretty clueless about the weather
tomorrow afternoon so I don't give them much more credibility about the past either.
A couple weeks at best. Maybe one year for big events.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

In Genesis we find the father of our faith, Abraham, and yet how little does the modern church resemble him? He had faith to leave a very secure estate and journey to a hostile land for the sake of a child not yet conceived, with his wife well beyond childbearing years. He and even had faith to sacrifice Isaac after he was born, trusting God had a deeper plan he couldn't understand. Yet we stumble over a Flood? And we don't believe Genesis 1 because it conflicts with naturalistic theories?

Genesis 1 will always be true..