What was the approximate date of the Flood?

[KWCrazy]

Not really, Swordfall, when you consider that natural law bends to the will of the Lord and not vice versa.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

The Flood was probably anywhere from 7000 to even 12000 BC. To put it closer to that is simply unrealistic. You have to consider the glaciers and why they are still here thereafter a great deluge.

No, it was not.
The ages of the patriarchs are given right up to Moses, and then the timeline is traceable from Moses to the incarnation of Christ, and we have history that goes right back to then.

The creation is a supernatural event that goes right back to the week Adam was created.

The sustaining of the creation is supernatural even today and forever.

There is no looking at what is to try to change what was, so as to fit the myth of unbelief in the Word of God, cause fallible men were not there and cannot even tell what is, in fact, now, on this earth and in its depths -and much less what is "out there".

 

[SwordFall]

Not really, Swordfall, when you consider that natural law bends to the will of the Lord and not vice versa.

So all the evidence of a worldwide flood is there, and not what goes against it?

Because the Flood happened when the glaciers melted at the end of the last ice age. It's not a coincidence science ties up with a major flood during mankind's initial primacy.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

So all the evidence of a worldwide flood is there, and not what goes against it?

Because the Flood happened when the glaciers melted at the end of the last ice age. It's not a coincidence science ties up with a major flood during mankind's initial primacy.

Nopew.
The flood happened when the fountains of the great deep were opened up and the windows of heaven were opened and the polar charge of the waters above and the polar charge of the waters below brought them together in a tight embrace for the first time since they were supernaturally divided and separated by the stretched out heavens, on day 2 of creation week.


Gen 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

 

[SwordFall]

Nopew.
The flood happened when the fountains of the great deep were opened up and the windows of heaven were opened and the polar charge of the waters above and the polar charge of the waters below brought them together in a tight embrace for the first time since they were supernaturally divided and separated by the stretched out heavens, on day 2 of creation week.


Gen 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

Or, the warming temperatures which caused the glaciers to melt ended up causing massive amounts of evaporation which led to massive amounts of rain.
Add that with glaciers melting, and you have a great deluge.

It's simplicity itself, fully rational and virtually certain.

You're basically just saying 'goddidit' with your proof being an over the edge, exhausting literal interpretation of scripture.

That's called lunacy. Why argue something so redundant when the answer is so simple?

 

[KWCrazy]

You're basically just saying 'goddidit' with your proof being an over the edge, exhausting literal interpretation of scripture.

That's called lunacy. Why argue something so redundant when the answer is so simple?

What you call lunacy, we call faith.
Why is it true? Because it's the word of God.
Was it lunacy that Jesus walked on the water because the laws of nature preclude it?
Was it lunacy that Jesus raised the dead because the laws of nature preclude it?
Was it lunacy that Jesus cast out demons because the laws of nature preclude it?
Was it lunacy that Jesus was born of a virgin because the laws of nature preclude it?
Was it lunacy that Jesus rose again from the grave because the laws of nature preclude it?

You profess to be a Catholic; a religion very deeply steeped in the faith of things which are absolutely impossible according to physical law. Which then, is false; your faith or your understanding of natural law?

If you believe that natural law is supreme then your religion is false.
If you believe that the Creator is supreme, then natural laws mean nothing.
Our Father could reverse the rotation of the earth in an instant with no adverse reaction whatever.

What God do you worship? What Scriptures do you enshrine?

All scientists agree that a global flood is impossible. There is a divided opinion as to whether it happened anyway. The OP contends that not only did it happen, but that it happened very recently. How are we to justify a science that states and occurrence to be an impossibility to then give an accurate date as to when it happened? Something here does not add up.

The genealogies, however, do add up. That's how we know the age of the Earth.

 

[SwordFall]

What you call lunacy, we call faith.
Why is it true? Because it's the word of God.
Was it lunacy that Jesus walked on the water because the laws of nature preclude it?
Was it lunacy that Jesus raised the dead because the laws of nature preclude it?
Was it lunacy that Jesus cast out demons because the laws of nature preclude it?
Was it lunacy that Jesus was born of a virgin because the laws of nature preclude it?
Was it lunacy that Jesus rose again from the grave because the laws of nature preclude it?

You profess to be a Catholic; a religion very deeply steeped in the faith of things which are absolutely impossible according to physical law. Which then, is false; your faith or your understanding of natural law?

If you believe that natural law is supreme then your religion is false.
If you believe that the Creator is supreme, then natural laws mean nothing.
Our Father could reverse the rotation of the earth in an instant with no adverse reaction whatever.

What God do you worship? What Scriptures do you enshrine?

All scientists agree that a global flood is impossible. There is a divided opinion as to whether it happened anyway. The OP contends that not only did it happen, but that it happened very recently. How are we to justify a science that states and occurrence to be an impossibility to then give an accurate date as to when it happened? Something here does not add up.

The genealogies, however, do add up. That's how we know the age of the Earth.

The Church has yet to make any dogmatic statement regarding the age of the Earth or a worldwide flood.

However, Catholic schools teach evolution, under the pretenses that God created the universe and we are the celebrants of of it. I.e. Descendants of Adam.

By extension, if one believes that the Earth is old, then one doesn't need a literal interpretation to explain a lot of the alleged evidences of the Flood.
In fact, one is left to explain why the scientific explanation is so remarkably good.

If anything, it's very suspicious how well science explains a history of the Earth with so much precision and detail.


And then you have many things that science explains that the Flood contradicts even still. Once the similarities end, the problems with a global flood begins.


What I mean by saying 'godidit' is that the argument is basically this: what we can't explain, we will replace with
*drumroll*
'godidit'.

And while one might think that nulls scientific evidence, it also nulls evidence for a worldwide flood because you can't expect that you should have evidence if you can't complete the picture by the same measure.

 

[miamited]

First of all, as many of you know I do adhere to a global flood. But what was its approximate date - when did it happen? My biblical chronologies have placed the creation of Adam somewhere around 4100 BC. The Flood happened approximately 1656 years later (I say approximately because we don't have the exact amount of months the person lived before begetting a child, only the years). That would place the global flood around 2450 BC or so. Thoughts?

Hi Achilles,

I would agree that your timeline is within a couple of hundred years of the actual date. I personally am not much interested in being any closer than that. When one begins looking back at historical events some 3 or 4 thousand years in the past, or even just a thousand years ago, I don't really find being particularly precise about the time of the event as of much importance. Even as regards the life of my Savior and trying to determine the year or day that he was born or died. The importance of the life of my Savior is not the least bit concerned with the 'when' but just the simple fact that he did.

That the Son of God came to us and laid down his life that we might be forgiven our sin and accepted in God's sight as one of the righteous to inherit eternal life, is the importance of the life of the Messiah. Exactly when he did that isn't of much concern.

That there was a global flood that once cleansed the wickedness of man from upon the earth and is a clear example to us that God will cleanse the earth of wickedness again, to me, is the lesson to be learned from the flood. That I am to understand that God can, and will, destroy life on this planet once again, just as He did in the days of Noah, is the message I believe God wants us to understand in the account of the days of Noah. Both Jesus and Peter point out this message to us.

So, again I repeat, I'm satisfied to understand the days of the actual flood to within a few hundred years. That it did happen sometime in the long historical past. That Gods' word is true. If one wants to say 2200 years ago or 2400 years ago is fine with me. However, if one wants to declare it 6 or 7 thousand years ago, then I would believe that person is basing his understanding on the wisdom of man and not the truth of God. We can, within a few hundred years, count up through the genealogies and the dates of rule of various historical kings, establish more reasonable dates for everything that we are told in the Scriptures.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted.

 

[SkyWriting]

First of all, as many of you know I do adhere to a global flood. But what was its approximate date - when did it happen? My biblical chronologies have placed the creation of Adam somewhere around 4100 BC. The Flood happened approximately 1656 years later (I say approximately because we don't have the exact amount of months the person lived before begetting a child, only the years). That would place the global flood around 2450 BC or so. Thoughts?

If one needs to use a calculator to add up numbers
adding and subtracting, then the answer is a distraction
from the message intended. The results of the calculation
and it's impact on faith is another indicator of it's lack of value.
Clearly the date is not part of God's intended message but
a human distraction from God's actual Word.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

If one needs to use a calculator to add up numbers
adding and subtracting, then the answer is a distraction
from the message intended. The results of the calculation
and it's impact on faith is another indicator of it's lack of value.
Clearly the date is not part of God's intended message but
a human distraction from God's actual Word.

In this instance, the message intended is indeed to date the creation and the flood, and the time of Christ's coming. It is a real date, and the creation really happened when it is recorded, and the flood really happened when it is recorded.
We have a clear chronological timeline from Adam to the flood, to going into the promised land of Israel, and so, to Christ coming in flesh, and to today.
Some people can add it all up without a calculator, being blessed with mathematical minds, but myself, I either use paper and pen or a calculator....

 

[SkyWriting]

In this instance, the message intended is indeed to date the creation and the flood, and the time of Christ's coming. It is a real date, and the creation really happened when it is recorded, and the flood really happened when it is recorded.

Yes, and there are no solid dates for those listed events.
In particular, the second coming.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Yes, and there are no solid dates for those listed events.
In particular, the second coming.

Actually, the second coming is dated exactly and specifically, but the date begins to be counted from a point in time that has not yet happened, and when it happens, the last seven years before His return to earth begin to be counted.

That happens only after the Church is removed from the midst of the world, but the rapture is not the specific beginning of that last seven years, though I always thought that it was, but it does not center on the Church's removal from the midst of the world, but on a peace covenant with the bad guys.
Simultaneously with that peace treaty, the two living witnesses of the incarnation, life, death, resurrection, ascension, and glory of the LORD Yeshua the Messiah, appear on earth below from heaven above, where they have been waiting for that day, so as to begin preaching the Messiah come, in the streets of Jerusalem.

And actually, according to Enoch's calendar, the very day of creation and of the flood can be counted backwards or forwards, by the cycle of the ordained years since creation.
Fall solstice is the beginning of the years, but the actual solstice for counting the days is counted from the day in which the evening and the morning is equal as to parts, in Jerusalem -for that is the very "navel" of the earth, as YHWH says, and His "center", as He says.
So God has laws set in the heavens for counting, and the histories that he gave dates the events exactly, from year to year, as it concerns His own elect and chosen people.

Anyone who studies with a mind to know is not left in the dark, for He has given the records.

 

[miamited]

Yes, and there are no solid dates for those listed events.
In particular, the second coming.

Hi SW,

I guess that depends on how you are defining 'solid'. Can we say that the rains which caused the flood began at 6pm EST on June 4, 4529 BC? No.

Can we date these events within a couple of hundred years based on the evidences and chronologies that God has included for us in the Scriptures? Yes.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[KWCrazy]

The Church has yet to make any dogmatic statement regarding the age of the Earth or a worldwide flood.

Christ confirmed the validity of the Scriptures including the story of Noah.

However, Catholic schools teach evolution, under the pretenses that God created the universe and we are the celebrants of of it. I.e. Descendants of Adam.

If they teach that Adam evolved, then they teach false doctrine. If they teach that animals reproduce after their own kind, then they teach the truth.

By extension, if one believes that the Earth is old, then one doesn't need a literal interpretation to explain a lot of the alleged evidences of the Flood.

However, if one claims his belief to be rooted in the Scripture, then he should be able to produce passages of Scripture that support that belief.


In fact, one is left to explain why the scientific explanation is so remarkably good.

And then you have many things that science explains that the Flood contradicts even still. Once the similarities end, the problems with a global flood begins.

Science cannot study the supernatural, nor can it accommodate a supernatural occurrence. Science is the study of the physical world only. Since it cannot accommodate a supernatural explanation, if a happening was supernatural then science can never find the real cause.

What I mean by saying 'godidit' is that the argument is basically this: what we can't explain, we will replace with *drumroll* 'godidit'.

You could say that if you were simply trying to explain the unexplained, however when the Scriptures state that God performed a miracle then the fact is God DID it. If Jesus cast out demons, then Jesus did it.

And while one might think that nulls scientific evidence, it also nulls evidence for a worldwide flood because you can't expect that you should have evidence if you can't complete the picture by the same measure.

You can't study the effects of a global flood without first knowing the exact pre-flood condition of the earth, which is only speculation. Again, science is only the study of the physical world and the natural laws that govern it. It can't address the subject of miracles, which cannot be studies scientifically because they violate natural law.

 

[SwordFall]

You can't study the effects of a global flood without first knowing the exact pre-flood condition of the earth, which is only speculation.

Speculation can come with mighty precision. For example, you were born, weren't you?
One can only speculate..

You keep talking about scripture, scripture, scripture- but it's really just your literal interpretation of scripture.
You don't take the Apocalypse literally, the end, so why do so with the beginnings?

Creationists and flood enthusiasts are simply people who grew up presumptuous of a literal interpretation, and just don't have the stones to let go and realize their interpretation was rudimentary.