Does a GLOBAL FLOOD truly seem like the BEST explanation for seashells on mountains?

[Joshua0]

No they don't.

I am talking about plate tectonics and the world wide flood. Both creationists and evolutionists agree on that now. Noah's flood was a shadow of the world wide flood that took place millions of years ago.

 

[florida2]

I am talking about plate tectonics and the world wide flood. Both creationists and evolutionists agree on that now. Noah's flood was a shadow of the world wide flood that took place millions of years ago.

NO.

There is no agreement about a world wide flood - there is simply no evidence for it.

You repeat this idea on numerous threads it's nearing spamming. You talk about Noah's flood and then say there was an even bigger flood millions of years ago? There is no evidence for either so why do you persist with this claim?

 

[freezerman2000]

No they don't. Do not put words into other people's mouths.

All cultures who started near a river are at some point going to experience a flood. Since they may not know about the existence of any other people or how big the world is, it is likely they would assume it was a flood to destroy the world. Not to mention how tales such as this can become exaggerated through the passage of time.

Allow me to elaborate..if you will..
If a group of prehistoric people were living in the basin where New Orleans is now,and a hurrican like Katrina were to hit,flooding that basin,would that not be a flood of biblical proportions to them?
Their world would have certainly ceased to exist,only to renew itself over time
If, generations later, someone wrote down that flood account,word for word from the story tellers (for ages,history was NOT written,it was passed on,by mouth),the facts of the event would,as florida so elequently posted,become exagerated.

 

[AV1611VET]

Allow me to elaborate..if you will..
If a group of prehistoric people were living in the basin where New Orleans is now,and a hurrican like Katrina were to hit,flooding that basin,would that not be a flood of biblical proportions to them?
Their world would have certainly ceased to exist,only to renew itself over time
If, generations later, someone wrote down that flood account,word for word from the story tellers (for ages,history was NOT written,it was passed on,by mouth),the facts of the event would,as florida so elequently posted,become exagerated.

Two things bear mentioning:

1. Did these cavemen predict the coming flood by 120 years?

2. One occupant of the Ark -- Shem -- lived right up to the time of Jacob; providing eyewitness testimony of what happened for centuries afterward.

 

[KWCrazy]

No, it doesn't fit with the evidence - big difference between evidence and religious belief

Your interpretation of evidence and mine will be vastly different, I presume.

1. The origin of life is an area which science doesn't exactly know what happened, which is why research is taking place as we speak. When science doesn't know something it presents an opportunity for increasing knowledge, not a sign of weakness.

No, let's be more precise here. Abiogenesis is not possible; not under carefully controlled laboratory experiments and certainly not in some mucky field somewhere. Scientists proved that life comes only from life. Any belief that it came into existence from any other source is therefore not scientific. However, evolutionists claim not only the spontaneous autogeneration of life, but also that that somehow that original life form contained ALL the genetic information possible for all living things to come from one source. What you are calling "scientific" is nothing more than superstition based on wishing for it to be so. Not only is is contra-indicated by known science, there is no provable experiments which support the claim. Science doesn't know what happened, yet "internet scientist"s continue to claim that which could not possibly have happened not only DID, but is accepted as fact.

2. Science only deals with the natural world - that's the whole point!

I've said that for years, yet "internet scientists" can't accept the limitations of science.

If there was demonstrable, repeatable evidence for God and other supernatural goings on then it would be part of science.

BUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!
You just said that science deals with the natural world. Why would you expect to find evidence of the supernatural, and how would you be able to discern it as such if science cannot STUDY the supernatural?

Science has only been able to prove the physical world exists. If there was evidence otherwise it would have been seen and would be part of science.

Nonsense! For science to accept the supernatural it would first have to STUDY the supernatural. As soon as you do, which is what paranormal investigators do, you are called a fraud by the same scientists who refuse to acknowledge it in the first place. All of your findings are dismissed and you are considered a fraud for having the audacity to investigate. Above that, you can forget about your research ever being published by "mainstream" journals.

If you wish to prove scientifically that God and miracles exist then you need to come up with proof.

If I could prove to you conclusively that God existed, then you could never have faith since faith is the belief in the unproved. You would be immediately damned because you are only saved by faith. Beyond that, if it were proven to you, nobody would ever believe you; just as they don't believe the millions who have had encounters with the supernatural.

If you believe in God then that's fantastic but don't go attacking science for it.

Attacking science? I'm not on a science forum attacking science, I'm on a Christian websight defending the faith from people like you who are not content in your disbelief; you feel the need to undermnine the faith of others as well.

Plate tectonics, a phenomenon which is measurable and tested, is responsible. Why not all mountains?

Measurable against what? Testable against what? You don't know the condition of the earth previous to the flood; nor the size, nor the atmospheric makeup. 92% of greenhouse gasses are water vapor. Sunlight filters through the moisture in the air which diffuses the colors of the spectrum and creates a rainbow, but rainbows did not exist pre-flood. What was the make-up of the atmosphere then? Do you know or do you have to guess? What was the geological makeup of the earth? What was its topograpy? How about its climate? You can only make guesses based on an old earth interpretation which presumes a static model very similar to today. You can't prove that. Regardless, if only one mountain existed and the water came 15 cubits over the peak, then gravity requires that the flood be global.

 

[freezerman2000]

Two things bear mentioning:

1. Did these cavemen predict the coming flood by 120 years?

2. One occupant of the Ark -- Shem -- lived right up to the time of Jacob; providing eyewitness testimony of what happened for centuries afterward.

THAT is not relevent to what I wrote..I was talking about how history gets garbbled when told by mouth over time.
If the first books of the Bible were written by Moses... were there scribes who copied historical accounts before him? The Bible does not say..Word of mouth was the acceptable means of keeping history alive.
Here's a little experiment for you and your friends to play.(The more the more effective the outcome is.)
Sit in a circle and the first person makes a statement to the next person,whispered in the ear,sheilded from sight of the others.That person turns to the next and does the same.
When the statement gets back to you,it will have changed..maybe a little,maybe a lot,but changed in some form,it will be.
Vocal histories tend to do the same.
How many tellings and retellings of the flood account occured between the time of the Flood and Shem meeting Jacob,and then,from the time of Jacob to when Moses wrote the account?
We have no idea.The Bible does not say.

 

[AV1611VET]

THAT is not relevent to what I wrote..I was talking about how history gets garbbled when told by mouth over time.
If the first books of the Bible were written by Moses... were there scribes who copied historical accounts before him? The Bible does not say..Word of mouth was the acceptable means of keeping history alive.
Here's a little experiment for you and your friends to play.(The more the more effective the outcome is.)
Sit in a circle and the first person makes a statement to the next person,whispered in the ear,sheilded from sight of the others.That person turns to the next and does the same.
When the statement gets back to you,it will have changed..maybe a little,maybe a lot,but changed in some form,it will be.
Vocal histories tend to do the same.
How many tellings and retellings of the flood account occured between the time of the Flood and Shem meeting Jacob,and then,from the time of Jacob to when Moses wrote the account?
We have no idea.The Bible does not say.

First of all, I'm familiar with the game you're talking about. It is known colloquially as "Arab phone" -- something e-scientists play here quite often with my posts.

Second of all, my point is that Shem would have been around to correct any portion of the story that started to get out of hand. I'm sure Shem and his nephew, Nimrod, had some dooseys of fights over Nimrod's Epic of Gilgamesh, which basically changed the Truth into fiction.

Thirdly, we believe that God divinely preserves His written word, and makes sure that It is passed on from generation to generation without error. That means that when Noah wrote Genesis 6-9, God preserved it without error, right up to the time of Moses and, eventually, you and I.

 

[freezerman2000]

so now I'm an e-scientist! Thankyou for the degree!
I guess that now I can call you an e-theologan?
You didn't disappoint me with your reply, it was just as I expected,although
I took a lot of time and thought to write my post and,I wasn't exactly expecting a

.

 

[freezerman2000]

If Noah wrote Gen.6-9 (something I have never heard of before) why is Gen. known as one of the books of Moses?

 

[freezerman2000]

I checked, and nowhere is 6-9 directly attributed to Noah.

 

[Joshua0]

it's nearing spamming.

This indicates to me that you are a long way off from even understanding what this conversation is all about. At least five years off. The theory we are talking about is the Catastrophic Tectonics Plate theory and you call that SPAM??? I am amazed to say the least. Esp in light of the fact that uniformitarian plate tectonics is widely accepted and even admissible in court. We are talking about creationism and this is a very strong creationist theory. It is not that I am wanting to argue Catastrophic vs Uniformitarian so much as I just want to get it out there that this is the evidence for the world wide flood that people keep asking for over and over and over again on this forum.

Clearly evolutionists want to confuse the issue and misrepresent what Creationists like Harvard trained, Kurt Wise PhD are promoting. May I add that Kurt Wise studied UNDER Gould at Harvard. In fact Gould defended him when the other students protested against his creationist beliefs.

 

[KWCrazy]

THAT is not relevent to what I wrote..I was talking about how history gets garbbled when told by mouth over time.
If the first books of the Bible were written by Moses... were there scribes who copied historical accounts before him? The Bible does not say..Word of mouth was the acceptable means of keeping history alive.

You should watch Roots: The Next Generations, or again if you've never seen it. In it you have a story teller speaking the story of the famiy Kinte. The author (Alex Haley) asks about his family hstory, and he has to sit through a long re-telling as the storyteller recites word for word the story of the family from the beginning. It is exactly the same every time. That is how the ancient storytellers worked. There was never a word forgotten or added because their very existence was about re-telling the stories perfectly every time.

Tell a person today a story one time and he will re-tell it wrong. Tell him it's his life's work to get the story right, and even today you can find those who can accomplish it. For example, many have committed the Koran to memory verbatim. To say that we can't do what the ancient storytellers could do is one thing, but to deny their dedication and precision is another.

In the case of the Torah, it was dictated to Moses directly by God. As such there was no room for imperfection. It was translated by men dedicated to doing so perfectly; men who were blessed by God so that no "jot or tittle" would be lost from the original telling to the return of Christ. There was an incredible reverence for the word of God, and an immediate curse for anyone who might try to alter it. That curse is not lost on those today who deliberately misrepresent what is in the Scriptures. While he lives he may find redemption through Jesus Christ, but if he dies unrepentant, the wrath of the Lord will befall him.

Galatians 1:
8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!

 

[Joshua0]

If the first books of the Bible were written by Moses... were there scribes who copied historical accounts before him?

It is believed and fairly well accepted that there were historical accounts on clay tablets before Moses. Remember that Moses was raised in the Pharaoh's house. This means he had the best education that Egypt had to offer and he had access to every book in his day. Also after leaving Egypt he studied under Jethro a Midian Priest and even married Jethro's daughter. Even though he tried to give her back and Jethro would not take her back.

Also Abraham was very well educated in the city of Ur that went on to become Babylon or the Babylonians. These people were very advanced in their day in Science. These two men were VERY highly educated men. That is why Moses could go before Pharaoh and argue his case, because of the very advanced educated that Moses had.

 

[freezerman2000]

Wiki states that the earliest Semitic writing showed up in Egypt.(I don't know how to find links to pages that are displayed, sorry, but if you go to Wikipedia and look for the History of Writing, the info is there,about halfway down the page..one drawback to Firefox!)
Between Noah and Abraham was a long time without an alphabet (no writing)

 

[AV1611VET]

If Noah wrote Gen.6-9 (something I have never heard of before)...

QV please: Tablet theory.

Genesis had several authors.

... why is Gen. known as one of the books of Moses?

Because Moses edited the book of Genesis, he did not write it.

 

[AV1611VET]

I checked, and nowhere is 6-9 directly attributed to Noah.

Check again, please.

 

[freezerman2000]

no, you show me..I've already checked..BTW, Who exactly were the authors of the "Books of Moses"?
The Pentateuch -- the first five books of the Bible

 

[createdtoworship]

I thought this a good time to agree with others on this point, that the old testament is divinely inspired not written by men's inventions: Exhibit A below is a clip from the famous book "Evidence that demands a verdict- by Josh Mcdowell" - as of yet I cannot find a better quote for to support this claim than his...

THE WITNESS OF THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS TO THE RELIABILITY OF THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES
The big question was asked first by Sir Frederic Kenyon, "Does this Hebrew text, which we call Massoretic, and which we have shown to descend from a text drawn up about AD 100, faithfully represent the Hebrew Text as originally written by the authors of the Old Testament books?"
The Dead Sea Scrolls give us the explicit and positive answer.
The problem before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls was, "How accurate are the copies we have today compared to the text of the first century?" because the text has been copied over many times, can we trust it?
What are the Dead Sea Scrolls?
The Scrolls are made up of some 40,000 inscribed fragments. From these fragments more than 500 books have been reconstructed.

....The oldest complete Hebrew MSS we possessed were from 900 AD on. How could we be sure of their accurate transmission since the time of Christ in 32 AD? Thanks to archaeology and the Dead Sea Scrolls, we now know. One of the scrolls found was a complete MS of the Hebrew text of Isaiah. It is dated by paleographers around 125 BC. This MS is more than 1,000 years older than any MS we previously possessed.
The impact of this discovery is in the exactness of the Isaiah scroll (125 BC) with the Massoretic text of Isaiah (916 AD) 1,000 years later. This demonstrates the unusual accuracy of the copyists of the Scripture over a thousand-year period.
"Of the 166 words in Isaiah 53, there are only 17 letters in question. Ten of these letters are simply a matter of spelling, which does not affect the sense. Four more letters are minor stylistic changes, such as conjunctions. The remaining three letters comprise the word 'light', which is added in verse 11, and does not affect the meaning greatly. Furthermore, the word is supported by the LXX and IQ Is. Thus, in one chapter of 166 words, there is only one word (three letters) in question after a thousand years of transmission - and this word does not significantly change the meaning of the passage."
F. F. Bruce says, "An incomplete scroll of Isaiah, found along with the other in the first Qumran cave, and conveniently distinguished as 'Isaiah B,' agrees even more closely with the Massoretic text."
Gleason Archer states that the Isaiah copies of the Qumran community "proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The 5 percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling."
Millar Burrows, cited by Geisler and Nix, concludes: "It is a matter of wonder that through something like a thousand years the text underwent so little alteration. As I said in my first article on the scroll, 'Herein lies its chief importance, supporting the fidelity of the Massoretic tradition.'"


McDowell, J. Evidence That Demands a Verdict- Vo. 1- Ch.4.

 

[AV1611VET]

The problem before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls was, "How accurate are the copies we have today compared to the text of the first century?" because the text has been copied over many times, can we trust it?

We've got the Authorized Version -- anything else is just fiction.

 

[florida2]

Scientists proved that life comes only from life. Any belief that it came into existence from any other source is therefore not scientific.

Thus far, but research is continuing into this.

I've said that for years, yet "internet scientists" can't accept the limitations of science.

Science deals with observing and explaining the universe. It looks at repeatable and testable phenomena in its explanations. How is it limited? If you start including supernatural explanations the whole discipline would be worthless and pointless.

BUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!
You just said that science deals with the natural world. Why would you expect to find evidence of the supernatural, and how would you be able to discern it as such if science cannot STUDY the supernatural?

When you've stopped your self-righteous laughter I'll explain. Science looks at the repeatable and the testable in order to come to explanations of how the universe works. God does not behave in this way so cannot be part of the explanations.

Nonsense! For science to accept the supernatural it would first have to STUDY the supernatural. As soon as you do, which is what paranormal investigators do, you are called a fraud by the same scientists who refuse to acknowledge it in the first place. All of your findings are dismissed and you are considered a fraud for having the audacity to investigate. Above that, you can forget about your research ever being published by "mainstream" journals.

If they found repeatable, testable and solid evidence for any such phenomena then it would be examined by the scientific community, leading to further research by others and eventually lead to peer reviewed literature. That's how it works. Not one such investigator has found any sort of scientific evidence, hence why such ideas have so far been rejected.

If I could prove to you conclusively that God existed, then you could never have faith since faith is the belief in the unproved. You would be immediately damned because you are only saved by faith. Beyond that, if it were proven to you, nobody would ever believe you; just as they don't believe the millions who have had encounters with the supernatural.

I know, it's quite a conundrum.

Attacking science? I'm not on a science forum attacking science, I'm on a Christian websight defending the faith from people like you who are not content in your disbelief; you feel the need to undermnine the faith of others as well.

People like me? Have you not noticed I'm a Christian?

Measurable against what? Testable against what?

We can measure the speed at which the plates move and how they interact. It's out explanation for earthquakes and volcanoes. It's a central pillar of modern geology.

You don't know the condition of the earth previous to the flood; nor the size, nor the atmospheric makeup

Au contraire, ice cores can give us a good look at past atmospheric conditions. It also depends when you postulate the flood happened. If you believe it was sometime in the last 6000 years we will have a much more accurate idea than if it supposedly happened a lot longer ago.

92% of greenhouse gasses are water vapor. Sunlight filters through the moisture in the air which diffuses the colors of the spectrum and creates a rainbow, but rainbows did not exist pre-flood.

Where do you get the 92% claim from? Are you saying that light and water behaved differently before the flood, meaning that rainbows weren't possible? Could it not just be a nice story and an explanation in ancient times for what rainbows were?

What was the make-up of the atmosphere then? Do you know or do you have to guess? What was the geological makeup of the earth? What was its topograpy? How about its climate? You can only make guesses based on an old earth interpretation which presumes a static model very similar to today. You can't prove that. Regardless, if only one mountain existed and the water came 15 cubits over the peak, then gravity requires that the flood be global.

There are experts in geology on this board who can give you a better answer than I could. Needless to say that there is no evidence for a worldwide flood of the kind that you are supposing. More likely there was a local flood which greatly damaged a culture which experienced it. The lack of knowledge of the size of the world could lead to it being interpreted as a worldwide event.