Geologic Evidences for the Genesis Flood

Status
Not open for further replies.

FallingWaters

Woman of God
Mar 29, 2006
8,508
3,321
Maine
✟38,902.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
"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.
 

MatthewDiscipleofGod

Senior Veteran
Feb 6, 2002
2,992
267
46
Minnesota
Visit site
✟13,302.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mindlight
Upvote 0

Sunrise78

Member
Jun 3, 2006
60
15
✟7,755.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
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.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
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.

Or acts of God! (literally, not in the modern vernacular)
 
Upvote 0

ClearSky

Active Member
Dec 21, 2007
141
12
✟7,834.00
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."

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.
 
Upvote 0

busterdog

Senior Veteran
Jun 20, 2006
3,359
183
Visit site
✟19,429.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
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.
 
Upvote 0

busterdog

Senior Veteran
Jun 20, 2006
3,359
183
Visit site
✟19,429.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married


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.

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.

copyChkboxOff.gif
Exd 7:3 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt.
copyChkboxOff.gif
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.
copyChkboxOff.gif
Exd 7:3 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt.
copyChkboxOff.gif
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.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Much of the marine life that we see fossilized like corral requires hundreds of years to grow and can only survive in shallow seas. The flood described in the Bible only lasted a year. There is also the issue that the flood was said to cover even the tallest mountains, Everest is over 29,000 feet tall but we still find fossils on mountains only a few thousand feet tall, this would be well within the midnight zone during the flood, which would result in the coral starving.

In short, the Flood was too short and too big.

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?
 
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

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

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.


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.

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.

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.

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.

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
 
  • Like
Reactions: FallingWaters
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
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

FallingWaters

Woman of God
Mar 29, 2006
8,508
3,321
Maine
✟38,902.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
None of my posts discussed God, evolution, or human development therefore I did not attack Creationism.

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
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
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

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.
 
Upvote 0

FallingWaters

Woman of God
Mar 29, 2006
8,508
3,321
Maine
✟38,902.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
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.
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.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
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.

Ah. I see. Thanks for the clarification.
 
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

Gwenyfur

Legend
Dec 18, 2004
33,284
3,326
Everywhere
✟66,698.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Constitution
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?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.