The Flood of Noah's Day

[dlamberth]

As I said, I am no geologist.
Any arguments against the geological evidence presented, you will need to take up with those presenting the evidence.
There is a way to do this, especially on www.academia.edu.
I've done that before.

Than your not wanting to look at what the Earth is actually showing us about the Global flood that did not happen.

 

[CoreyD]

Than your not wanting to look at what the Earth is actually showing us about the Global flood that did not happen.

Why do you say that?
I'm saying to you that what the earth shows us, is not directly seen, but interpreted.
If you deny this, then you deny every paper, journal, and article that demonstrates this.
Here is one that seeks to show that, in fact, the geological sciences have their own philosophical structure.

So, are you denying that what we are observing is indirect evidence, and not direct evidence showing something specific?

 

[dlamberth]

Why do you say that?
I'm saying to you that what the earth shows us, is not directly seen, but interpreted.
If you deny this, then you deny every paper, journal, and article that demonstrates this.
Here is one that seeks to show that, in fact, the geological sciences have their own philosophical structure.

So, are you denying that what we are observing is indirect evidence, and not direct evidence showing something specific?

I'm saying that what we're observing in the Earth itself is direct evidence that there was no Global Noah type of flood. Geology of floods is well understood. The magnitude of the flood of a supposed global size and violence would leave clear direct physical geological evidence behind. It would be impossible to hide the geological signs after that floods passing. Especially one that was suppose to have happened a mere 4000 years ago.

 

[CoreyD]

I'm saying that what we're observing in the Earth itself is direct evidence that there was no Global Noah type of flood. Geology of floods is well understood. The magnitude of the flood of a supposed global size and violence would leave clear direct physical geological evidence behind. It would be impossible to hide the geological signs after that floods passing. Especially one that was suppose to have happened a mere 4000 years ago.

Please provide the paper supporting your "direct evidence" assertion.

 

[jayem]

That is a good question, which you will have to take up with those who believe that God "knows everything that has or will happen".
That is not the view of every person professing to believe the Bible.
I believe that while God has the ability to know everything, God exercises that ability according to his will. There are some things God has not chosen to know, and some things God chose to know.
This is supported by the fact that the Bible records things that God did not, and does not know.

So, what is your reason for saying the biblical account of the flood of Noah's day is illogical, to one who does not believe in God foreknowing everything?

Here's a link to a website discussing God's omniscience. And I'll quote the 1st paragraph:

Omniscience is defined as “the state of having total knowledge, the quality of knowing everything.” For God to be sovereign over His creation of all things, whether visible or invisible, He has to be all-knowing. His omniscience is not restricted to any one person in the Godhead—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all by nature omniscient.

What does it mean that God is omniscient? | GotQuestions.org

It makes no sense that an omniscient God chooses to be oblivious to evil human behavior, and then is shocked by it. So shocked that he regrets ever creating mankind. Can you not see how illogical this is?

 

[Zaha Torte]

Here's a link to a website discussing God's omniscience. And I'll quote the 1st paragraph:

Omniscience is defined as “the state of having total knowledge, the quality of knowing everything.” For God to be sovereign over His creation of all things, whether visible or invisible, He has to be all-knowing. His omniscience is not restricted to any one person in the Godhead—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all by nature omniscient.

What does it mean that God is omniscient? | GotQuestions.org

It makes no sense that an omniscient God chooses to be oblivious to evil human behavior, and then is shocked by it. So shocked that he regrets ever creating mankind. Can you not see how illogical this is?

God knew that Man would Fall and that He would eventually bring the Flood waters.

Why do you claim that He was shocked or surprised?

 

[Grafted In]

God can do whatever He wants. Noah's flood did occur, according to Scripture. If science cannot agree with that, what does it make of the sun standing still for a day?

 

[CoreyD]

Here's a link to a website discussing God's omniscience. And I'll quote the 1st paragraph:

Omniscience is defined as “the state of having total knowledge, the quality of knowing everything.” For God to be sovereign over His creation of all things, whether visible or invisible, He has to be all-knowing. His omniscience is not restricted to any one person in the Godhead—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all by nature omniscient.

What does it mean that God is omniscient? | GotQuestions.org

You will have to take it up with those who believe that, as I mentioned.

It makes no sense that an omniscient God chooses to be oblivious to evil human behavior, and then is shocked by it. So shocked that he regrets ever creating mankind. Can you not see how illogical this is?

What do you mean by "chooses to be oblivious to evil human behavior"
God was aware of the "evil human behavior" when it took form.
God was grieved that man went this far.

God knew that sinful mankind had fallen far below his moral standards, but allowing them to exercise free will, God did not get to know what man would do.
Why does it not make sense that God would be disappointed and grieved at what developed with the human family?

Wasn't God disappointed that his children - Adam and Eve - disobeyed him? Genesis 3:9-13
God is not a callous unfeeling person. The Bible says God hurts, feels pained, and saddened. Or he can be made to rejoice. Psalm 78:50, 41; Proverbs 27:11; Genesis 6:6
So, I don't understand what you find difficult about understanding God's grief at man's actions, and consequence.

What you say would only not make sense, if God already knew in advance every event and situation of man.
However, knowing before hand would probably not change his grief.
There is a difference between being grieved, and being shocked, and the bible does not say God was shocked.

 

[BPPLEE]

God can do whatever He wants. Noah's flood did occur, according to Scripture. If science cannot agree with that, what does it make of the sun standing still for a day?

Chuck Missler had a theory that there was a near pass with Mars and the Earth's orbits and the gravitational pull caused the long day of Joshua

 

[BPPLEE]

I'm saying that what we're observing in the Earth itself is direct evidence that there was no Global Noah type of flood. Geology of floods is well understood. The magnitude of the flood of a supposed global size and violence would leave clear direct physical geological evidence behind. It would be impossible to hide the geological signs after that floods passing. Especially one that was suppose to have happened a mere 4000 years ago.

One forum member ( the rules prevent me from posting his user name) says there's no evidence of a global flood because God cleaned it all up

 

[sjastro]

Please provide the paper supporting your "direct evidence" assertion.

Instead of using deflecting arguments such as demanding posters produce evidence there was no global flood which has been done, and the typical false dichotomy fallacy that mainstream science makes assumptions, radiocarbon dating is inaccurate etc all of which validates the global flood, how about defending the veracity of your sources such as this?

Global Stratigraphy Supports a Progressive Worldwide Flood

Purpose Is there geological evidence for a global flood? Is there evidence that the waters rose and peaked on Day 150 as recorded in Genesis 8? And at what level in the geologic record did it peak? ICR’s current geological research team has made one of the first attempts to map the true extent...

www.icr.org

My goodness you are scraping the bottom of the barrel with this one, ICR is renowned for spreading misinformation about science.
Here it assumes the global flood model is correct and attempts to fit the stratigraphic column data to the assumption, instead of the data leading to the conclusion it supports the model.

ICR has taken the evidence for geological periods covering hundreds of millions of years and the megasequences, rises and falls in sea levels which span multiple periods down to a mere 300 odd days according to Genesis.

The megasequences are relatively dated in other words the oldest sedimentary layers are at the bottom of the stratigraphic column and are become progressively younger further up the column.
Reducing hundreds of millions of years of geological history to 300 odd days is so patently ridiculous because it ignores when mass extinctions have occurred. At the end of the Permian 252 million years ago, 96% of species such as trilobites became extinct, nearly 200 million years later it was the turn of the dinosaurs.
Trilobite fossils are not found in the Zuni and Tejas megasequences and dinosaur fossils are absent from the most recent Tejas megasequence.

How does reducing millions of years geological history to 300 odd days explain this?
Did humans, trilobites and dinosaurs coexist before day 1, trilobites became extinct around day 100 and dinosaurs at day 150 of the flood?
It doesn’t make sense how you look at it but I’m giving you the opportunity of explaining how the fossil record is consistent with the global flood that rose and receded in 300 odd days but if true to form this will remain unanswered.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Chuck Missler had a theory that there was a near pass with Mars and the Earth's orbits and the gravitational pull caused the long day of Joshua

That's not how orbital mechanics works. I am not surprised that this Velikovskian notion comes from Missler. A while back someone posted here a long video from Missler where he was presenting the similarly Velikovskian "Electric Universe" nonsense.

 

[Zaha Torte]

God can do whatever He wants. Noah's flood did occur, according to Scripture. If science cannot agree with that, what does it make of the sun standing still for a day?

I believe that those who claim that that there was no Flood for whatever reason have imagined for themselves a Flood-narrative that the Bible does not support.

 

[dlamberth]

I believe that those who claim that that there was no Flood for whatever reason have imagined for themselves a Flood-narrative that the Bible does not support.

For me, it's local floods that grew in stature through story telling over time as the narrative also became religionized.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I believe that those who claim that that there was no Flood for whatever reason have imagined for themselves a Flood-narrative that the Bible does not support.

Most people don't* rely on the bible (or rather Genesis) for the geological history of the Earth. We use the rocks.

(* or at least they shouldn't)

 

[Zaha Torte]

For me, it's local floods that grew in stature through story telling over time as the narrative also became religionized.

I believe that the entire Earth was at one point under water - but it would be akin to a full immersion baptism - a person goes down and comes up.

The Genesis account does not claim that the entire Earth was under water for the same period of time that Noah was in the Ark - only that it had been under water.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Most people don't* rely on the bible (or rather Genesis) for the geological history of the Earth. We use the rocks.

(* or at least they shouldn't)

They are free to do so. Good luck to them. I am going to continue to look for atoms with my naked eye.

 

[BPPLEE]

I believe that the entire Earth was at one point under water - but it would be akin to a full immersion baptism - a person goes down and comes up.

The Genesis account does not claim that the entire Earth was under water for the same period of time that Noah was in the Ark - only that it had been under water.

The Deluge | Koinonia House

There are many Christians who do not take the record of the Flood in Genesis seriously. They consign the account to a moral lesson without regarding the narrative as actual fact.

www.khouse.org

 

[Hans Blaster]

The Deluge | Koinonia House

There are many Christians who do not take the record of the Flood in Genesis seriously. They consign the account to a moral lesson without regarding the narrative as actual fact.

www.khouse.org

Missler writes (in 2004):

There is no question that tangible evidence indicates there was once a flood over the entire earth. Many competent books have chronicled the numerous fossils of sea animals found at extremely high altitudes all over the world, as well as fossils of land animals in arid areas below sea level.

Which was well known not to demonstrate the things he claims already by 2004 (and by 1984). It's just the same global flood "evidence" claim utterly contradicted by the rocks themselves.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Missler writes (in 2004):

There is no question that tangible evidence indicates there was once a flood over the entire earth. Many competent books have chronicled the numerous fossils of sea animals found at extremely high altitudes all over the world, as well as fossils of land animals in arid areas below sea level.

Which was well known not to demonstrate the things he claims already by 2004 (and by 1984). It's just the same global flood "evidence" claim utterly contradicted by the rocks themselves.

What do the rocks claim?