Evolution or descent with modification?

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
No bottleneck means no flood. What source do you use for your translation?

No bottleneck means that Noah's grandsons had a million women to choose from since prehistoric people had been on the present Earth for Millions of years BEFORE the Ark arrived 11k years ago, according to History. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE

I use the KJV since it is an old one with fewer alterations which modern man has included in their flawed versions. The JW version claims that Jesus is not God. They don't know that God is ONE. Deu 6:4
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
The point is that your version first said it was not "deep enough".

Nope. Many people perish in floods within sight of high ground. Also, high ground doesn't help if you have no food or shelter, if you could even get to it. Your goose is cooked anyway. :eek:

Any version of the Flood that is small enough not to have left clear evidence is so small that the Ark itself was superfluous.

Many events happen without clear evidence. You have to consider what such evidence would be and where such evidence would be left.

The problems with the Ark are endless.

Made-up problems. For example a made-up flood would certainly sink a made-up ark. The real ark would survive the real flood, and did.

Endless evidence that tells us that it did not happen and no reliable evidence for it.

There's actually lots of evidence. You just have to know where, and where not, to look.


Taking a part of the Bible that should be a morality tale and treating it as if it really happened harms Christianity.

The flood story is written as an actual event, although it is loaded with metaphors.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
Seven of the eight were likely 'mongrels',

Unscriptural since the people on the Ark were Humans, created with an intelligence like God's. Genesis 3:22 The "mongrels" were the sons of God (prehistoric people) who had descended from the last universal common ancestor on planet Earth. Noah's sons and daughters in law had grandsons who married and had children with the prehistoric people who were everywhere 11k years ago. Genesis 6:4 It's how and why all Humans today have a chromosome 2 which is fused.

carrying the genetic characteristics of perhaps dozens of ethnicities, which would explain the rise of so many differing peoples shortly after the flood. Recall that only Noah was "perfect in his generations" (genealogy?)

The only ethnicities came from our ancestors who descended from water. Genesis 1:21 Noah's grandsons were direct descendants of Adam, who was formed from the dust of the ground. Genesis 2:7

Noah was not righteous but simply forgiven and filled with the Holy Spirit, which is the only thing about Humans which is "perfect".

Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Amen?
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Nope. Many people perish in floods within sight of high ground. Also, high ground doesn't help if you have no food or shelter, if you could even get to it. Your goose is cooked anyway. :eek:
Your flood would have been limited to lowlands. Not everyone lives there. Most would not even have to climb a small hill. People that did in floods tend to be on the flood plains. By the way, there is a reason that they have that name.

Many events happen without clear evidence. You have to consider what such evidence would be and where such evidence would be left.
Yes, but if someone claimed that a herd of buffalo just stampeded through their house and you rush over and there is no evidence of such a stamped do you believe him or not? Large scale events DO leave large scale evidence.

Made-up problems. For example a made-up flood would certainly sink a made-up ark. The real ark would survive the real flood, and did.

Sorry, a real flood would have left real evidence. You have a made up flood.
There's actually lots of evidence. You just have to know where, and where not, to look.

If there was evidence it would be accepted in the world of science.

The flood story is written as an actual event, although it is loaded with metaphors.

Um, no. The problem with a flood is that it ultimately is a claim of a God that lies. Even when I was a Christian I did not believe that God lied. You should be thankful. The Flood story paints God as being rather evil if read literally. As an allegory one can focus on the Noah part of the story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Seven of the eight were likely 'mongrels', carrying the genetic characteristics of perhaps dozens of ethnicities, which would explain the rise of so many differing peoples shortly after the flood. Recall that only Noah was "perfect in his generations" (genealogy?)
No, you are forgetting that Noah's sons were the product of him and his wife. At the very most you would have 5 genomes to work with. That of Noah and his wife and the three wives of the three sons. Cheetahs did not have that bad of a population bottleneck and there is no need to go through genetic matching when one does a transplant. The fact that transplants are very dangerous, with even matched people rejecting organs, tells us that there was no flood.
 
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
If you go by that standard then the Ark was not needed. That is a local flood, of which there is evidence of. Legends often start out based upon real events. But as I said, the Ark was not needed for that flood. One thing to remember is that real life events do leave real life evidence behind.

Amen and Adam's firmament is at the bottom of Lake Van, Turkey where is sank releasing the 450 ft Ark into our world. The firmament is more like a Submarine since it protected Adam's Earth from the water which surrounded it. Genesis 1:6-7
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Unscriptural since the people on the Ark were Humans, created with an intelligence like God's. Genesis 3:22 The "mongrels" were the sons of God (prehistoric people) who had descended from the last universal common ancestor on planet Earth. Noah's sons and daughters in law had grandsons who married and had children with the prehistoric people who were everywhere 11k years ago. Genesis 6:4 It's how and why all Humans today have a chromosome 2 which is fused.



The only ethnicities came from our ancestors who descended from water. Genesis 1:21 Noah's grandsons were direct descendants of Adam, who was formed from the dust of the ground. Genesis 2:7

Noah was not righteous but simply forgiven and filled with the Holy Spirit, which is the only thing about Humans which is "perfect".

Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Amen?
How did those 'prehistoric' people survive the flood?
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
No, you are forgetting that Noah's sons were the product of him and his wife.

Noah: Genetically pure for God's purpose.
Wife: Likely mixed genealogy.
Sons: Likely three different characteristics (white, black, yellow) because of mother.
Sons wives: Three more likely widely varying genetic characteristics.

Result: A very diverse genetic pool carried over: no bottleneck.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Your flood would have been limited to lowlands. Not everyone lives there. Most would not even have to climb a small hill. People that did in floods tend to be on the flood plains. By the way, there is a reason that they have that name.

The scriptural narrative says the high hills were covered (some translations say "highest mountains'', which was not necessary.

Yes, but if someone claimed that a herd of buffalo just stampeded through their house and you rush over and there is no evidence of such a stamped do you believe him or not? Large scale events DO leave large scale evidence.

I like this analogy. Would you deny such a stampede through a mountain valley if no evidence was found on the steep sides of the mountain? That's what is happening with the flood.

Sorry, a real flood would have left real evidence. You have a made up flood.

There is evidence of global flooding all over the globe, just not on the mountainsides (why would there be?).

If there was evidence it would be accepted in the world of science.

Worldwide flooding is accepted by science. They reject the flood because there is no remaining evidence on the steep sides of mountains, and why would there be after 4000 years of wear by rain, snow, and wind? In fact nearly all of Noah's flood evidence would be long gone.

Um, no. The problem with a flood is that it ultimately is a claim of a God that lies. Even when I was a Christian I did not believe that God lied. You should be thankful. The Flood story paints God as being rather evil if read literally. As an allegory one can focus on the Noah part of the story.

I would hate to think what humanity would look like if there had been no flood :eek:, if humanity would even have survived this long.
 
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

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Noah: Genetically pure for God's purpose.
Wife: Likely mixed genealogy.
Sons: Likely three different characteristics (white, black, yellow) because of mother.
Sons wives: Three more likely widely varying genetic characteristics.

Result: A very diverse genetic pool carried over: no bottleneck.
You really need to read up on what alleles are. And there is no such thing as "genetically pure". This approach also paints God as a strange mixture of incompetence and rather strangely evil planning ahead. It also removes the concept of free will for Noah's offspring. It is simply not a good story for Christianity when taken literally.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You really need to read up on what alleles are. And there is no such thing as "genetically pure". This approach also paints God as a strange mixture of incompetence and rather strangely evil planning ahead. It also removes the concept of free will for Noah's offspring. It is simply not a good story for Christianity when taken literally.

Don't alleles mean even more variety?
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
The scriptural narrative says the high hills were covered (some translations say "highest mountains'', which was not necessary.

"High hills" would have left evidence for any flood that threatened man. We do not see that evidence where we do see evidence of smaller older floods. This is why the story fails.


I like this analogy. Would you deny such a stampede through a mountain valley if no evidence was found on the steep sides of the mountain? That's what is happening with the flood.
You did not understand the analogy. Try again.

There is evidence of global flooding all over the globe, just not on the mountainsides (why would there be?).

No, there is not. There is evidence of smaller local floods that occurred at different times. This is not evidence of a global flood. You see to be a global flood they would all have to be at the same time.

Worldwide flooding is accepted by science. They reject the flood because there is no remaining evidence on the steep sides of mountains, and why would there be after 4000 years of wear by rain, snow, and wind? In fact nearly all of Noah's flood evidence would be long gone.
Nope. There are separate small floods at different times all around the world. This is evidence against the flood since a worldwide flood would leave evidence all of the same age. Instead we see both more recent and older floods. The older floods should have been "written over" by a larger younger flood, but that flood is not to be seen.

I would hate to think what humanity would look like if there had been no flood :eek:, if humanity would even have survived this long.

Just look outside right now. Homo sapiens have been walking the Earth for at least 200,000 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Don't alleles mean even more variety?
An allele is a version of a gene. For example there is an allele that gives blue eyes (there are actually several alleles for eye color but the blue one is rather obvious). Genetic diversity can be measured. We know how fast new genes are incorporated into the genome, so we can date when certain events that lowered the genetic diversity occurred. A few thousand years with only a handful of people will not produce the variation that we see today. Cheetahs are an excellent example of this. They did have an almost "Noah's Ark" level of population bottleneck about 10,000 years ago. And even with their shorter generation, which means more new variations would have been introduced than in humans in that time period, they are still all so closely related that organ transplants are not a problem.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
How did those 'prehistoric' people survive the flood?

It was Adam's world which was totally destroyed in the flood. The present Earth is a rock with a molten core and could NEVER be destroyed in a flood. Adam's world was only miles in diameter, had only 4 Rivers which all came from the same source in the Garden. Genesis 2:10 Texas has almost 4k Rivers. The mountains on Adam's flat Earth were covered with water when it reached a depth of 15 cubits or 22.5 feet. Genesis 7:20

The sky in Adam's world was like a canopy which spread over his entire miles wide world. When the canopy was opened and it rained for forty days and nights, the bottom of the firmament filled with water and sank, releasing the Ark into Lake Van, Turkey on the 150th day after the flood began. Genesis 7:20-24 AND Genesis 8:4 History records the arrival of the FIRST Humans (descendants of Adam) at 11,000 years ago in the mountains of Ararat.

Only Noah and his family survived to bring God's superior intelligence Genesis 3:22 to our planet of the common ancestor of Apes. History agrees and records the emergence of modern Human traits with the FIRST Human farming in the valleys below the mile high Lake Van. God's Truth is the Truth Historically. Amen?
 
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

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
LOL! You do not want to go down that rabbit hole with him.

EDIT: But he is a prime example of why I ask people for their version of the Flood.

Is that why you run and hide from my understanding which agrees with Scripture, science, history and genetics and NO one can refute me in any way? Of course it is. As with all believers in man-made science, you operate with only a partial truth. God's Truth is the Truth in every way. Amen?
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Is that why you run and hide from my understanding which agrees with Scripture, science, history and genetics and NO one can refute me in any way? Of course it is. As with all believers in man-made science, you operate with only a partial truth. God's Truth is the Truth in every way. Amen?
Don't make false claims about others. You have not been willing to learn from your errors. Science does not agree with you. You have some very strange beliefs that you cannot support.

I pretty much ignore you since you simply cannot support your claims.
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Nope. There are separate small floods at different times all around the world. This is evidence against the flood since a worldwide flood would leave evidence all of the same age. Instead we see both more recent and older floods. The older floods should have been "written over" by a larger younger flood, but that flood is not to be seen.

Why would Noah's flood leave uniform evidence?
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Why would Noah's flood leave uniform evidence?

I never said uniform evidence. But since the flood was roughly one year long all of the evidence for the flood would have almost exactly the same date. The different floods you are looking at can be dated and their dates will be different.
 
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