The Flood - Have We Got It Wrong?

[Matariki]

Is there any scientific and historical evidence that coincides with the biblical account of the flood? Is it possible that we have misread scripture and that our interpretation of the events are wrong?

 

[Tim Myers]

I see the flood story quite differently than most believers, I guess.....

Instead of seeing an angry, disgruntled God drowning every human being on earth for being bad, I see a loving God trying to save mankind from an unprecedented global catastrophe....

 

[Matariki]

I see the flood story quite differently than most believers, I guess.....

Instead of seeing an angry, disgruntled God drowning every human being on earth for being bad, I see a loving God trying to save mankind from an unprecedented global catastrophe....

The question isn't so much the morality behind it, but whether or not that it actually happened on a world wide scale as it says in scripture and if whether or not there is any scientific evidence or historical evidence (outside of the bible) to support it.

 

[Tim Myers]

Although I have no evidence to support my view, I have often thought that the Atantic Ocean broke through what is known as the Strait of Gibraltar today and just sort of washed over the area where Noah and his family supposedly lived.....

 

[ajunkyarddog]

There is some evidence for it. Signs of water near the tops of mountains show that at one time it was flooded enough with water to reach the mountain's top. There is also fossil evidence.
The thing is, I don't believe there will ever be complete evidence of such a thing as everything is an educated guess and nothing can be proven. We can just go off reasonable assumptions. Only the truly ignorant would believe science has the past so right. Some even believe carbon dating is a completed science and irrefutable "proof" of time.

 

[singpeace]

One line of evidence -- fossilized remains of marine life on top every major mountain range in the world. For example, clusters of hundreds of gigantic oysters weighing as much as 560 lbs, found at the top of the Andes Mountains.

Another line of evidence -- the planet is covered in layer-upon-layer of sedimentary rock which consist mostly of eroded, displaced, re-solidified sediments which were transported, separated, and re-distributed in some sort of a fluid, typically water. The layers of sedimentary rock contain the fossilized remains of billions and billions of displaced dead things. For example, fossilized trees buried upside-down and right-side-up, often passing through multiple rock layers. This is the result of a marine cataclysm. These "polystrate" fossils are a worldwide phenomenon.

A third line of evidence -- there are hundreds of flood legends preserved by different people on every continent.


A good source for more evidence is the book, In the Beginning by Dr. Walt Brown, PhD (from MIT).

 

[Varicose Brains]

I see the flood story quite differently than most believers, I guess.....

Instead of seeing an angry, disgruntled God drowning every human being on earth for being bad, I see a loving God trying to save mankind from an unprecedented global catastrophe....

Yes, God loved humanity so much he decided to wipe them all out (and not just humanity, but all the animals as well). Not only this, God is supposedly omniscient; at the time of creation God knew he would eventually commit genocide. If God really wanted to start over, why didn't he just remake man and this time not put a stupid tree and talking snake together in the same garden? In other words, a God who has absolutely NO qualms about committing genocide shouldn't have spared a thought for Noah and should have just started over, this time getting it right.

For this reason I think the Flood story is just that, a story. Archaeologically there has been (so far) no evidence to support a global flood. Also, the whole notion of Noah getting all those animals onto a boat is just silly. How, for example, did Noah get over 2 million species of animal onto his Ark? Not only that, how did Noah get Kangaroos onto his Ark? They're only found in Australia. Did God pick a pair up and plonk them down in front of Noah and then, after the flood, put them back in Australia? What about termites? How did Noah manage to keep them from breeding and thus eating holes into the Ark?

There are just too many questions regarding the Flood for me to be convinced that it's real.

 

[Papias]

Back in the early 1800's geologists (made up then almost entirely of Christians) decided that the evidence showed that there could not have been a global flood. Today, that is still the consensus of practically all geologists.

You can find an overview of some of the lines of thought related to flood geology here: Flood geology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . As with anything on wikipedia, check the primary references, which are at the end of the article.

Papias

 

[Greg1234]

Is there any scientific and historical evidence that coincides with the biblical account of the flood? Is it possible that we have misread scripture and that our interpretation of the events are wrong?

I would say that there was a point or points of severity. That's where the initial cause was generated and where you would find most of that described in the bible (water over the mountains, complete wipe outs etc). Those can be easily obtained. The word used as "earth" would describe a landmass or landmasses. At the same time, it is not justified to place it into the "local" category. The magnitude of the disaster would have altered the climate causing floods globally. There would be other disasters such as earthquakes, tidal waves, shifts, etc. Those are also easily obtained. So I would say on that note that it was also a global flood. Similar to the type of disaster a meteor strike would generate. In light of the aftermath, calling it a "local fire" doesn't justify its severity.

For extinction as described, I would agree with the information provided in this link. Other Flood of Noah Survivors.

 

[Biblewriter]

While some claim that there is no archeological evidence of Noah's Ark, There is a boat shaped mound near mount of Arrarat as Noah's ark. This mound is found at elevation of approximately 6350 feet. It is the length reported in the Bible, and bowed out at the sides to slightly wider than the width reported in the Bible. Its area corresponds to the deck area reported in the Epoch of Gilgamesh.

Radar scans of the mound showed a structural framework internal to the mound. Excavation at the sight unearthed a fossilized iron rivet connecting fossilized wood beams.

When presented with this and other evidence, the government of Turkey formally recognized the site as the remains of Noah's ark, made it a kind of national park or monument, and built a visitor center there. Due to bad weather and dangerous travel, the center is open only about two or three three months a year. If you do not believe me, call the Turkish embassy in Washington. I did, and they confirmed that they had indeed recognized the site as the remains of Noah's ark.

 

[Faith.Man]

Is there any scientific and historical evidence that coincides with the biblical account of the flood? Is it possible that we have misread scripture and that our interpretation of the events are wrong?

I have believed that Noah's Flood was a large local flood for quite some time, not global as most Christians believe. If interested in this interpretation, consider reading "A Biblical Case for an Old Earth" by Dr. David Snoke. There is a section of the book devoted to Noah's Flood.

 

[iambeeman]

I got to spend some time with a Phd geologist who said there is evidence all over the place, and he gave a talk on the subject

http://scitascienda.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/2-20091114-wmbc-silvestru-flood.mp3

http://scitascienda.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/2-20091114-wmbc-silvestru-evolution.mp3

http://scitascienda.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/1-20091114-wmbc-silvestru-genesis.mp3

The first one is Flood related the other 2 overlap some (if memory serves). And there are a bunch more audio and some video from the conference in general for those who are interested here Westman Bible Conference

 

[Martingale]

Is there any scientific and historical evidence that coincides with the biblical account of the flood? Is it possible that we have misread scripture and that our interpretation of the events are wrong?

when has lack of evidence been important to creationists?

 

[Martingale]

....

A third line of evidence -- there are hundreds of flood legends preserved by different people on every continent. ...

how about that! civilizations evolve on flood plains because that's how crops are fertilized. when you live on a flood plain, guess what ... sometimes there's a really big flood.

 

[iambeeman]

how about that! civilizations evolve on flood plains because that's how crops are fertilized. when you live on a flood plain, guess what ... sometimes there's a really big flood.

If you don't mind me asking, what would you say if there were no flood myths with a high correlation to the flood account of Noah?

 

[Papias]

Sing wrote:

there are hundreds of flood legends preserved by different people on every continent. ...

First of all, if the Noah myth actually happened, then everyone on those continents would have been dead - the stories would all have come from the descendants of Noah. Thus the key wouldn't be that they all had flood stories, but rather that they all had ark stories, which they don't.

Instead, we see just what Martingale suggested - that people need to live by rivers for water and navigation, and that rivers flood, so of course we all have flood stories. We also all have hero stories - does that mean that the legend of hercules must be real?

iambeeman wrote:

flood myths with a high correlation to the flood account of Noah?

Except that they don't correlate all that well. Read them yourself here:
List of flood myths - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


For instance, the Australian story is about a frog that the wombat tricked into giving water to the land (which the frog had drank), by getting the eel to make the frog laugh and spew out the flood. The chinese story is about a hero who manages the flood by building dikes and cutting mountains with a magic battle axe - no boat involved. etc. One feature seen often is the repopulation of the earth from a few people - which is logically needed, since a flood would kill most or all people, thus requiring repopulation. They certainly don't correlate very well to the Noah story, except where you'd expect them too (like there being a flood, etc.).

It's a pretty odd coincidence that the story that matches the Noah story the best is the Epic of Gilgamesh - which just happened to be written in the middle east just before Genesis, allowing copying.

We again see that Martingale's point is likely correct.

Faith.Man wrote:

I have believed that Noah's Flood was a large local flood for quite some time, not global as most Christians believe.

Perhaps the strongest evidence in support of Faith.Man is the fact that the geology of the earth shows that there was never a global flood. Practically all geologists agree on this now, and have since Christians studying geology concluded over 150 years ago that the evidence from the rocks shows that the flood of Noah never happened.

Dozens of geologists of the day - nearly all of them committed, Bible believing Christians, worked extremely hard, many devoting countless hours their entire lives to trying to make flood geology work. A good example of this is the Rev. Adam Sedgwick. Please read his story here:

Adam Sedgwick - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He publicly recanted his support for flood geology in 1831, after he had been it's strongest, and one of it's last, supporters. Since then, literally thousands of Christian geologists have added their sweat to the attempt to salvage flood geology, and have also failed to square the idea of a global flood with the continually growing evidence against it.

So a flood supporter is seriously saying that they know better than hundreds of Christian Geologists, who have devoted their entire lives to the attempt to salvage flood geology, who have concluded that no such flood happened.


Biblewriter wrote:

There is a boat shaped mound near mount of Arrarat as Noah's ark. This mound is found at elevation of approximately 6350 feet. It is the length reported in the Bible, and bowed out at the sides to slightly wider than the width reported in the Bible.

Every few years there is a hoax, when someone uses the Noah legend to get money from gullible Christians. You'd think that after so many repeats of this same story over the years, and so many hoaxes, people would wise up. The most recent hoax was just a few years ago, and the fact that the charlatans brought would in to plant as fake evidence was exposed. Biblewriter seems to be mentioning the Durupinar site, which has been shown to be a natural formation (I'd ask Biblewriter for scientific verification of the details he gave - they sound an awful lot like the made up hoax stuff put out by the shiesters who bilk Christians using this stuff).

The upshot is that these repeated hoaxes only make Christianity look gullible and stupid. It's no wonder fewer and fewer people give them any credibility. By supporting them there, (hopefully) unknowing Christians hurt Christianity.

In addition to all of this (the geologic proof that a global flood never happened, the ark hoaxes, and so on), a moment's reflection shows that there is so much that is silly about thinking the ark story is literally true that it's no surprise that doing so makes us the butt of jokes. For instance, how could the animals get to the ark? Survive for a year (food, water, exercise, etc.)? Fit on the ark? Be cared for (thousands of animals) by 8 people? Get back from Ararat to their present homes? Find something to eat after a yearlong flood? and so on.........

Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition

It's time we moved on to preach the gospel, instead of supporting a laughably silly literal interpretation of Genesis.

Papias



http://www.christianforums.com/t7511286-6/#post56154670

 

[iambeeman]

Aprox. 2/3 of flood stories appear to have a great correlation

1. Is there a favored family? 88%
2. Were they forewarned? 66%
3. Is flood due to wickedness of man? 66%
4. Is catastrophe only a flood? 95%
5. Was flood global? 95%
6. Is survival due to a boat? 70%
7. Were animals also saved? 67%
8. Did animals play any part? 73%
9. Did survivors land on a mountain? 57%
10. Was the geography local? 82%
11. Were birds sent out? 35%
12. Was the rainbow mentioned? 7%
13. Did survivors offer a sacrifice? 13%
14. Were specifically eight persons saved? 9%

I got this list from Why Does Nearly Every Culture Have a Tradition of a Global Flood?

Of course there isn't going to be exact correlation between the accounts, but there is enough to give one at the very least pause.

 

[Papias]

iambeeman wrote:

I got this list from Why Does Nearly Every Culture Have a Tradition of a Global Flood?

First of all, the fact that you just cut and pasted this from a creationist website, who don't list the stories or have a reference other than "my personal collection as a creationist" by itself shows that the list has no credibility. Maybe you can look over the stories themselve (which I provided a link for) and test some of these claims, instead of just cutting and pasting from an admittedly biased source?

Aprox. 2/3 of flood stories appear to have a great correlation

Secondly, "2/3" isn't a "great correlation. Plus, looking closely at these shows how empty any correlation is. Specifically:

Is there a favored family? 88%

All stories will have a protagonist, and most will have some relative of the protagonist, so most stories will have a favored family, whether they are flood stories or not. The supposed "correlation" is expected.

Were they forewarned? 66%

Most mythological disaster stories have foretellings by prophets and gods The Greek mythology has the whole Oracle of Dephi, even. The supposed "correlation" is expected.

Is flood due to wickedness of man? 66%

Mythological disaster stories are often the punishement of the gods. Even after the recent Japan tsunami, there was talk about this being divine punishment. Ancient people were even more likely than those today to think natural events were divine punishment. I'm surprised it's not higher than 66%. The supposed "correlation" is expected.

Is catastrophe only a flood? 95%

Well, Duh, we picked out flood stories - of course they are stories about floods. That's the whole point. Hey look, when I picked out all the red M&Ms, I looked, and all the M&M's were red! Now how could that have happened!?!? The supposed "correlation" is expected.

Was flood global? 95%

Stories, like fish that got away, get bigger with more retelling. How is the flood being global a surprise? The supposed "correlation" is expected.

Is survival due to a boat? 70%

Hmmm.... If I were to make up a story about a flood, what would I survive in...... Of course they mostly use boats! The supposed "correlation" is expected.

Were animals also saved? 67%

Well, animals obviously exist today, so they must have survived the flood, so ..... Duh. The supposed "correlation" is expected.

Did animals play any part? 73%

Ancient people lived with animals around, and animals pervade most ancient myths. Why would flood myths be any different? The supposed "correlation" is expected. What percentage of all ancient myths do animals play a part in? 73%?

Did survivors land on a mountain? 57%

Let's see, a flood covers the land, and as it recedes, the highest locations are exposed first. What are the highest locations........ Duh. The supposed "correlation" is expected.

Was the geography local? 82%

Not sure what is meant here. What geography is not local? How do you test this? Do you understand the list you cut and pasted?

Were birds sent out? 35%

sent out for what? Again, this is too vague to tell what is meant, we don't know if his personal, biased accounting is reliable, and 35% is hardly "highly correlated" anyway.

Was the rainbow mentioned? 7%
Did survivors offer a sacrifice? 13%
Were specifically eight persons saved? 9%

These are all so low as to be meaningless, especially since ancient people talked to each other, and copied each other's stories, just as they do today.

Of course there isn't going to be exact correlation between the accounts, but there is enough to give one at the very least pause.

Those accounts give you pause? Really? Even when many cultures have written them down thousands of years ago, providing much less time for change, and they still show what one would expect from simple flooding since people live by rivers?

Funny how many cultures have records (both written and archeological) extending straight through (before and after) the supposed flood, and they never record that their whole kingdom was annihilated and everyone was dead, but that never shows up in either the written nor archeological records of those civilizations at around 2,500 BC. How could they not have noticed that everyone was dead and their civilization gone? Isn't that a little stronger reason to give one pause?

Papias

 

[Jazer]

Is there any scientific and historical evidence that coincides with the biblical account of the flood?

The DNA for the Haplogroup J2 would show evidence for that date based on the founder effect. The geneology in the Bible is accurate and science has evidence for that.

 

[iambeeman]

Except that they don't correlate all that well. Read them yourself here:
List of flood myths - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not much of a link, at very best it could be called a limited list of brief summaries, and certainly not "read for yourself" materiel.

A book I'm told is good but hasn't made it to the top of my "to read" list is "Flood Legends" by Charles Martin.