youngh earth local flood

[vossler]

What we know from science should not be used to against God's word.

But, what about this: I want to use the science we know today to echo what God says? If you agree on this one, then you approve that scientific knowledge and God's word are NOT mutually exclusive.

Of course we should use science in this manner and yes scientific knowledge and Scripture are anything but mutually exclusive. Anytime we can use science or anything else to glorify God; I'm all for it.

If so, why couldn't someone also use science to disagree with what God says?

I actually believe there are instances where this is viable. Specifically in matters of little or no spiritual consequence. An example would be whether we live in a geocentric or heliocentric world.

 

[myways]

Look, the Bible clearly says in Psalm 104: that the waters would never again cover the whole planet. So if you want to argue only about what the Bible says on the topic then there you have it--local flood.

--dave

 

[juvenissun]

Look, the Bible clearly says in Psalm 104: that the waters would never again cover the whole planet. So if you want to argue only about what the Bible says on the topic then there you have it--local flood.

--dave

On the contrary, it is amazing that the Psalm 104 says that. Because it is 100% scientifically correct. It is impossible to have a global flood in today's world (again). Borrow one argument from atheist, there is simply not so much water to do it one more time.

 

[Mallon]

I want to use the science we know today to echo what God says?

Out of curiosity, if we're only going to accept that science which agrees with a literal interpretation of the Bible, what do you think is the point of doing it to begin with if we already know the answer?

 

[myways]

oops!
what i meant to say was that psalm 104 says that the waters would never cover the earth again after the creation week, not the flood.

--dave

 

[Gareth]

It's a strange thing to say but some Christians do not accept the book of Genesis at all. So they should re-read it again. The reason for this is to help the reader understand the magnificence of God. To create the universe with it's thousands of galaxies and billions of stars and in an unknown time-scale and then create this planet with a correct axis ratio in relation to the sun, the correct distance from the sun, the correct atmosphere and gravity to support life, to actually begin to create life in abundance truly compels the reader of Genesis to accept God for what he has done to allow us to exist. There is nothing yet discovered a planet quite like this one. And yet people dismiss some things in Genesis as having happened on a limited scale, like the flood. In so doing they undermine the Creator, God and what he inspired Moses to write down. Jesus accepted the Flood account as written as did others. So are those ones who say it didn't happen or to the scale as written in scripture actually saying Jesus was wrong in his belief? After all he saw it happen, he was alive in heaven when it occured so why a deception on his part? So you see, if a person makes a sweeping statement as some have done in saying the Flood never happened on a worldwide scale, that Noah never built an ark, that God never did help bring the animals to Noah, that there never were fallen Angels on the earth....

Do you see the deception taking place and how much it undermines the Word of God? The Bible never deceives. It never lies. It is a message from God to us, and some of "us" regard this message with suspicion. They should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[myways]

No no no. The geographical scope of the flood has no signifigance. What is important is that it destroyed all of humanity as God intended. The scale written in scripture is a geographically local scale. And Noah did build an ark. Psalm 104 tells us that the flood was local and did not cover the whole earth.

--dave

 

[juvenissun]

Out of curiosity, if we're only going to accept that science which agrees with a literal interpretation of the Bible, what do you think is the point of doing it to begin with if we already know the answer?

The Scripture is not a science book. It does not explain science feature. People read the scripture for thousands of years. They did not read any science out of the Words.

It is extremely significant to match some of the Scriptures with knowledge we learned from science today. To me, it "proves" that God's word is truth.

 

[Mallon]

What we know from science should not be used to against God's word...

...I want to use the science we know today to echo what God says

It is extremely significant to match some of the Scriptures with knowledge we learned from science today. To me, it "proves" that God's word is truth.

I understand completely.

 

[juvenissun]

oops!
what i meant to say was that psalm 104 says that the waters would never cover the earth again after the creation week, not the flood.

--dave

It is interesting. Are you suggesting that Gen 1:9 is the global flood and it never happened again after Gen 1:10? I don't think this is what Psalm 104:6 is saying. Because Psalm 104:5 describes the land (already exist). So Psalm 104:6 is NOT the same as Gen 1:9.

Instead, I think Psalm 104:6 describes the Noah's Flood. So, Psalm 104:9 becomes true since the Flood.

In fact, Psalm 104:8 is a really critical key verse.

 

[BobRyan]

1. The Flood "destroyed the world" as Peter says in 2Peter 3.

2. It covered "the highest mountains" as we see in Gen 7.

3. It destoryed not ONLY all humans but all animals on the earth with the "breath of life" in them according to Gen 7.

I can not imagine HOW Moses could have written these words to his readers with the intent of their concluding "this was just a local even then -- according to Moses".

Exegesis does not appear to allow for such an edit.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Assyrian]

It is interesting. Are you suggesting that Gen 1:9 is the global flood and it never happened again after Gen 1:10? I don't think this is what Psalm 104:6 is saying. Because Psalm 104:5 describes the land (already exist). So Psalm 104:6 is NOT the same as Gen 1:9.

Instead, I think Psalm 104:6 describes the Noah's Flood. So, Psalm 104:9 becomes true since the Flood.

In fact, Psalm 104:8 is a really critical key verse.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
2 The earthwas without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

Psalm 104:5 He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved.
6 You covered it with the deepas with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains.

If you look through Psalm 104 its structure is very interesting, it follows the order of creation described by the days in Gen 1. But of course that places the deep here with the deep in Gen 1:2 before God raised the land out of the waters.

I would have though you would really go for a passage like this Juv, it is describing the earth covered by a primordial ocean before the land rose out of the sea. That is pretty much the situation before plate tectonics raised the continents out of the sea, apart from the odd chain of volcanic islands, the earth was pretty much covered in ocean.

 

[juvenissun]

Gen 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
2 The earthwas without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

Psalm 104:5 He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved.
6 You covered it with the deepas with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains.

If you look through Psalm 104 its structure is very interesting, it follows the order of creation described by the days in Gen 1. But of course that places the deep here with the deep in Gen 1:2 before God raised the land out of the waters.

I would have though you would really go for a passage like this Juv, it is describing the earth covered by a primordial ocean before the land rose out of the sea. That is pretty much the situation before plate tectonics raised the continents out of the sea, apart from the odd chain of volcanic islands, the earth was pretty much covered in ocean.

Thanks for the list and the comparison.

1. I don't like to take the "earth" in Gen 1:2 as the earth. Provided that it says the "earth" has no shape yet. I don't even like to think it means the nebula.

2. I like the sequential description of Psalm 104:6-9. You explained it well. And the verse 8 is simply a vague image of plate tectonics, which created the land (and the sea).

-----

The more I think about this, the more I feel that the time line since the creation must have been screwed up. Everything described in Gen 1 and in the Noah's Flood make sense to me except the time frame. ICR (or AiG ?) people proposed the idea of "accelerated plate tectonics" and suggested that all the current mountain ranges were made in the past 6000 years. I don't necessary agree with them on the specifics. But I think the key point is still on the problem of timing.

The geological concept of the catastrophism is more realistic than the uniformitarianism. We have never seen any geological catastrophe since we have history. May be there is a catastrophe to come in 2012. On the serious side, we really do not know how the earth would behave during the period of magnetic reversal. And I have no problem to believe that one is to come soon (it is crazy that on one of the day I saw a map which indicated that a reversal already exist somewhere on a small area over the Indian Ocean). I think the behavior of the earth during the reversal is certainly more than just the switch of polarity. Most likely, one process would trigger another process (include a sudden global warming due to the release of the gas hydrate) and a chain of processes would take place nearly at the same time. It would be REAL fortunate if one is going to happen soon.

 

[Gareth]

No no no. The geographical scope of the flood has no signifigance. What is important is that it destroyed all of humanity as God intended. The scale written in scripture is a geographically local scale. And Noah did build an ark. Psalm 104 tells us that the flood was local and did not cover the whole earth.

--dave

Yes, yes, yes. Sorry couldn't resist and as we're getting up to the festive season I wonder if Singin' in the Rain will be shown yet again on TV?!

Anyways Noah built an Ark on the spec God gave him. It was 300x50x30 cubits in length, width and height. A cubit is as far as I can remember from the tip of a middle finger to the elbow, about 18 inches. So that is 450x75x45 feet and a bit more (forgot the extra inches!) in length, width and height. This is a huge undertaking if the Flood was a "local event". It took years to build and all the while Noah preached to the people living at that time. If it was a local event all they had to do was move out, yet this did not happen. Why not? Maybe because the fallen angels had to be put into a situation by which they could not use their force against all that Noah had done. These ones knew full well that if God decreed something, it would happen.

Yet they remained silent. They could of saved their wives or their children by sending them into the Ark. But their now demonised position made them think of only themselves. They came to earth to gratify their sexual desires and now they were willing to sacrifice their families knowing full well they could dematerialise their bodies and return to the heavenly realms and save themselves.

In addition the Bible states that it was God who closed the door to the ark. God's power is far more that that of angels. By this act alone, the fallen angels could not use their power to force their way onto the ark. If they could there would be little doubt as to their intention: kill Noah and his family.

So, if reasoned on, the Flood account had to be global, not local. God's anger against humanity is targeted against only those who refuse to listen and take action. The earth will never be flooded again yet we do face a great tribulation before Armageddon. Will that be a local or a global event?

 

[juvenissun]

Yes, yes, yes. Sorry couldn't resist and as we're getting up to the festive season I wonder if Singin' in the Rain will be shown again on TV?!

Anyways Noah built an Ark on the spec God gave him. It was 300x50x30 cubits in length, width and height. A cubit is as far as I can remember from the tip of a middle finger to the elbow, about 18 inches. So that is 450x75x45 feet in length, width and height. This is a huge undertaking if the Flood was a "local event". It took years to build and all the while Noah preached to the people living at that time. If it was a local event all they had to do was move out, yet this did not happen. Why not? Maybe because the fallen angels had to be put into a situation by which they could not use their force against all that Noah had done. These ones knew full well that if God decreed something, it would happen.

Yet they remained silent. They could of saved their wives or their children by sending them into the Ark. But their now demonised position made them think of only themselves. They came to earth to gratify their sexual desires and now they were willing to sacrifice their families knowing full well they could dematerialise their bodies and return to the heavenly realms and save themselves.

In addition the Bible states that it was God who closed the door to the ark. God's power is far more that that of angels. By this act alone, the fallen angels could not use their power to force their way onto the ark. If they could there would be little doubt as to their intention: kill Noah and his family.

So, if reasoned on, the Flood account had to be global, not local. God's anger against humanity is targeted against only those who refuse to listen and take action. The earth will never be flooded again yet we do face a great tribulation before Armageddon. Will that be a local or a global event?

Interesting thinking.
But I doubt the fallen angels knew the flood would become true. The Flood is a one-time deal happened to the earth. It comes from God only. I don't even think good angels knew it ahead of time (they might be the work force to make it happen, and take care of Noah's family and animals).

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

I would agree that Psalm 104 is talking about Noah's flood. I also believe Genesis clearly is talking about a global flood and don't see how it could be talking about anything else. Also, if the earth was young but the flood was local you would have an impossible time explaining the fossils we find all over the world. If you have problems with how Noah and the ark would be able to do what they needed to do I suggest the book Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study.

 

[marktheblake]

The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was local, and God told Lot to move. Doesnt make sense then if the flood was local, why God didnt tell Noah to move to a different place or higher ground.

Particularily when there was many occasions that he 'relocated' person or persons.

When the flood account is scrutinised sensibly, there is really only one question that is really difficult to explain or understand, that is the logistics of looking after the animals on the ark. We simply do not know, God didnt tell us. That alone is not a sufficient reason to reject the flood account.

 

[juvenissun]

The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was local, and God told Lot to move. Doesnt make sense then if the flood was local, why God didnt tell Noah to move to a different place or higher ground.

Particularily when there was many occasions that he 'relocated' person or persons.

When the flood account is scrutinised sensibly, there is really only one question that is really difficult to explain or understand, that is the logistics of looking after the animals on the ark. We simply do not know, God didnt tell us. That alone is not a sufficient reason to reject the flood account.

Like I said, angels must have done a lot of work. Do you really think angels are just sit aside and watch everything to happen? In particular, this critical event also involved fallen angels.

It is interesting that as I am writing this, I realized for the first time that Noah's Flood is really an event involved more than just natural (scientific) processes. This certainly make the explanation easier.

 

[marktheblake]

Like I said, angels must have done a lot of work.

I cant see any reason for ruling out Angels being involved, certainly is a possibility. We do know for one think that God closed the door on the Ark.

However personally I dont support this, I dont see any scriptural support that might imply that, and I figure that God doesnt need Angels to help him (why he specifically uses them on other occasions, I do not know- incgonito maybe)

It is interesting that as I am writing this, I realized for the first time that Noah's Flood is really an event involved more than just natural (scientific) processes.

Thats right, there has been significant studies on the plagues of Egypt, how these events can be explained scientifically and how they consecutively relate. One was by the Discovery Channel, probably flawed, another in a book "The Miracles of Exodus..." which is a brilliant study, by Colin J Humphreys who is a genuine Scientist.

The point he makes is not that he has been able to explain away the miracles as natural causes, but rather is confirming the realistic possibility that these events did occur and that there were natural events shaped by our God.

My point is that I beleive God created the flood by shaping natural events, rather than just pointing the finger at it just rained. I guess a simplistic way of putting it, is he gave nature a 'nudge'

 

[juvenissun]

Well those angels did live in the heavenly realms so they knew how their Heavenly Father behaved. They were there when the Earth was created, so when a man like Noah says the Creator was going to do something about the world of wickedness that these angel were part of and had contributed towards, do you really think they would of been in the dark as to what their Father would do?

Yes, I do believe that angels do not know much about what is going to happen on the heavens and the earth. They are only messengers and work force for God. They do not participate in the planning of any future/past event. In other words, they do not "manage" God's project at any level.

An exciting expectation based on faith is: We will actually participate in the management of God's kingdom. This is how we are fundamentally different from angels.