Evidence for a World-Wide Flood

[Orogeny]

I will say thanks for pointing me to that thread concerning the polystrate fossils

Pleasure.

"If that were the case then there would be a layer of sand world-wide all consistent with the age of the flood and contain fossils of all life forms."

Do we not forget that GOD is at work here?

That is right- God's creation is his most vocal work, so we can rest assured that the processes evidenced therein are the true processes by which our earth was formed and operates. This heavily precludes a literal flood, as there is no evidence in the rock record that I am aware of that positively indicates the past occurrence of such an event.

Here is the issue – when it comes to evaluating earth’s history via modern geology, God is a contingency factor that is removed.

God is an untestable factor. As such, he may not be included as a variable in scientific endeavor. Nonetheless, unless you would like to claim that god either cleaned up after the flood, or made flood deposits that mimic the products of depositional processes in action today (making God deceptive), we needn't add Him to the equation.

Just as the Flood was an act of God transcending the natural order, no different are the events that lead to the waters receding.

Yet we don't observe deposits indicative of a rapid, worldwide transgression and subsequent regression, as one would see were the entire earth flooded.

Yet here we have a “geologist” trying to dictate what we should have found or what we shouldn’t?

First off, geologists don't dictate what is found in the rock record, we observe the rock record and report on it. Second, I don't call you a "christian", so don't call me a "geologist". I spend every day of my life seeking to better understand the rock record, so please don't call my training or my profession into question.

Essentially, spending all that time studying modern geology is a waste of time,

This is nonsense. Modern geology is applied successfully every single day and provides you and me with resources that would be unavailable to us using a flood model for geology. So unless you'd like to put your money where your mouth is and stop using petroleum products and metals, I'd say you should probably retract your 'waste of time' junk.

seeing how the conclusions it presents are in direct contradiction with how we are told things happened.

No, they're simply counter to your personal interpretation of the bible. Clearly your interpretation of the bible and what is observed in reality are in conflict, so one of these things needs to change. Don't expect reality to.

Not only do you not believe God did what He said He did, but you are not even allowing God to be God. Thanks, but I know which God I believe in, and He doesn’t lie.

Can you point me to chapter and verse where God says 'I literally made a flood cover the entire earth'? Or are there simply chapters in the bible that were written by men that include a story about a flood event?

Look, your bible (created by men) and the universe (created by god) don't disagree. Why are you trying to make them disagree?

 

[RevelationSong]

In reguards to a world wide flood, I read an article about whether Noah's flood was actually worldwide or local

We have been told in the biblical account that the flood would cover the "earth", that everything in the "earth" would die, and other statements about the "earth", all of which would teach the idea of a world-wide flood - EXCEPT for one thing: Hebrew word "erets", especially in the Book of Genesis. Its translated "earth" 665 times, "land" 1581 times, "country" 44 times, "ground" 119 times, "lands" 57 times, "countries", 15 times, and a few others. It seems that the “land” overflowed the “earth” in KJV (pun intended).

There is some evidence of massive flooding In the black sea region, called the Black Sea Deluge which happened around 7500 years ago (5600 BCE). (The exact year is in debate)

This is just a theory on my part, but it seems at least plausible in my mind.

 

[gluadys]

In reguards to a world wide flood, I read an article about whether Noah's flood was actually worldwide or local


There is some evidence of massive flooding In the black sea region, called the Black Sea Deluge which happened around 7500 years ago (5600 BCE). (The exact year is in debate)

This is just a theory on my part, but it seems at least plausible in my mind.

Certainly makes more sense than people whose world was limited to the ANE writing about a global flood for which there is not a scintilla of geological evidence.

 

[smithdavid]

Awesome Post!!!!!!!!


Thanks to sharing....

 

[Keachian]

I got bored reading this, it's the same old hat. Just going to note though that from my understanding of ancient Hebrew worldview Mesopotamia and adjoining regions were considered "the whole earth" possibly even with Jerusalem/Mount Ararat at the centre. Tell me again why we're trying to understand this text from a culture so far removed from the original audience? Shouldn't we not first try to understand the culture that it was written in/to and then try and make statements based upon that?

 

[Keachian]

In reguards to a world wide flood, I read an article about whether Noah's flood was actually worldwide or local


There is some evidence of massive flooding In the black sea region, called the Black Sea Deluge which happened around 7500 years ago (5600 BCE). (The exact year is in debate)

This is just a theory on my part, but it seems at least plausible in my mind.

And yes this^

 

[Keachian]

And an expansion on the idea of it being parabolic, in the Bible the imagery surrounding water is akin to rebirth/birth out of chaos, we see this in Genesis 1, the theology of Baptism, Elijah calling back the rain, I would argue that in the same way we see that happening in the same way through Genesis 6-9, all of humanity is in Chaos/sinfulness and through the flood we see the rebirth of the human race, still flawed as we see in chapter 9

 

[Greg1234]

And an expansion on the idea of it being parabolic, in the Bible the imagery surrounding water is akin to rebirth/birth out of chaos, we see this in Genesis 1, the theology of Baptism, Elijah calling back the rain, I would argue that in the same way we see that happening in the same way through Genesis 6-9, all of humanity is in Chaos/sinfulness and through the flood we see the rebirth of the human race, still flawed as we see in chapter 9

Hm, so how would Darwinism fare with man spiritually being reborn as man?

If his rebirth is based on his spiritual basis, and visible comes from the invisible, then physical man would come from the spiritual image and not from bacteria, no?

From the looks of it, man does seem to be reproducing and adapting according to man (and not the camel) within.

 

[Keachian]

Hm, so how would Darwinism fare with man spiritually being reborn as man?

Ask a darwinist, I'm not a darwinist stop treating me as one, I am a Christian, you however are a gnostic, you have said so yourself.

If his rebirth is based on his spiritual basis, and visible comes from the invisible, then physical man would come from the spiritual image and not from bacteria, no?

While I'm not too sure what this has to do with the flood account. I believe that you could find the answer to your question in my exegesis of Genesis 1 found here:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7640607-8/#post60047083

From the looks of it, man does seem to be reproducing and adapting according to man (and not the camel) within.

Well, yes we are now man which is a subset of apes, which is a subset of monkeys, which is a subset of primates, which is a subset of mammals, which is a subset of tetrapods, which is a subset of vertebrae. I'm not sure what your point is.

 

[FrozenOne]

Past failure to answer honest flood questions opened the door to evolution and old-earth beliefs. Answering those questions will begin to (1) reestablish the flood as earth’s defining geological event, and (2) reverse serious errors that have crept into science and society. Don’t be surprised at how catastrophic the flood was. Just follow the evidence.

Figure 42: Fountains of the Great Deep.

In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - The Hydroplate Theory: An Overview

 

[Jase]

Past failure to answer honest flood questions opened the door to evolution and old-earth beliefs. Answering those questions will begin to (1) reestablish the flood as earth’s defining geological event, and (2) reverse serious errors that have crept into science and society. Don’t be surprised at how catastrophic the flood was. Just follow the evidence.

Figure 42: Fountains of the Great Deep.

In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - The Hydroplate Theory: An Overview

There was no global flood. Stop relying on frauds at creationist websites. They are feeding you junk, not science. There have been at least 5 mass extinctions on Earth, not 1.

 

[Mr.Waffles]

There was no global flood.

The veracity of Biblical claims is not contingent on what we find or do not find at this point in time, 2012 A.D. There "apparently" is no sufficient proof that there ever existed a mass Hebrew slave population in Egypt either, does that mean we should take a huge chunk of the OT as fictional? Oops, but doesn't even the TE consider everything post Abrahamic covenant to be historical anyways? The issue here is that you are denying what the Bible clearly presents as a historical event.

Stop relying on frauds at creationist websites. They are feeding you junk, not science.

Oh, and like the scientific community isn't feeding everyone else junk. The life sciences in particular tends to be a cesspool of junk, particularly when anything evolution-wise is involved, which is mostly everything nowadays.

This is just the byproduct of a materialist mindset, when it comes to evaluating the evidence, God is a contingency factor that is removed, i.e. He ceases to exist. You might as well pass off the splitting of the Jordan river and talking donkeys as being fictional as well, not to mention how God lied when He told Moses He could raise a nation for him from the stones of the Earth. Learn your place, for your own good.

There have been at least 5 mass extinctions on Earth, not 1.

You didn't think that one through, did you?

 

[Jase]

The veracity of Biblical claims is not contingent on what we find or do not find at this point in time, 2012 A.D. There "apparently" is no sufficient proof that there ever existed a mass Hebrew slave population in Egypt either, does that mean we should take a huge chunk of the OT as fictional? Oops, but doesn't even the TE consider everything post Abrahamic covenant to be historical anyways? The issue here is that you are denying what the Bible clearly presents as a historical event.

The Bible also presents the Earth as geocentric and flat. But I'm guessing you somehow manipulate those verses to align with modern day science because not even most Creationists can claim geocentrism with a straight face.

Oh, and like the scientific community isn't feeding everyone else junk. The life sciences in particular tends to be a cesspool of junk, particularly when anything evolution-wise is involved, which is mostly everything nowadays.

What type of junk? Do you have evidence of this junk or are you just making things up as you go along?

You didn't think that one through, did you?

Is there something about that statement that doesn't make sense? Earth has had at least 5 extinction level events that wiped out most life on Earth, including sea life. The Bible only discusses 1.

 

[gluadys]

Oops, but doesn't even the TE consider everything post Abrahamic covenant to be historical anyways?

No.

 

[dollarsbill]

The only conclusions I can make is either we have not been diligent enough in our research or we have been spending too much time absorbing information from scientific proponents who are bias and downright dishonest in how the evidence is handled and interpreted.

Yeah, I think scientists like to play god and receive worship.

 

[Mr.Waffles]

The Bible also presents the Earth as geocentric and flat.

No it doesn't. The Bible does not default towards heliocentrism nor geocentrism, as it doesn't address cosmology specifically. The flat earth argument is also a fallacy, as it is hinged on being uneducated in matters of historical linguistics, i.e. ancient Hebrew. There are no equivalents in the language to denote 3 dimensional objects (i.e. globe, sphere, planet, etc.). If you had to appeal to only the 2nd dimension, what shape would you use to describe the earth?

But I'm guessing you somehow manipulate those verses to align with modern day science because not even most Creationists can claim geocentrism with a straight face.

Yea...no. You being uninformed does not equate with me being dishonest.

What type of junk? Do you have evidence of this junk or are you just making things up as you go along?

At face value - Darwinian evolution is a myth and does not happen, i.e. junk. Specifically, evolution has veered away from its initial associations with actual science, with respect to how it is being integrated in various related discplines, such as anthropology. It is a philosophy, not a science, and has no roots in any real science (it never had to begin with). If you do not know what I am talking about, then you just are not aware of how evolutionary theory is being used and implemented in the scientific community.

Is there something about that statement that doesn't make sense? Earth has had at least 5 extinction level events that wiped out most life on Earth, including sea life. The Bible only discusses 1.

The point is that we have proof of such mass extinction events.

 

[Mr.Waffles]

No.

At least a few I have encountered on these forums do. Well, that's good to hear, only by answering "no" I sure hope you don't mean to say that even post Abrahamic covenant should be considered non-historical.

 

[Marshall Janzen]

The flat earth argument is also a fallacy, as it is hinged on being uneducated in matters of historical linguistics, i.e. ancient Hebrew. There are no equivalents in the language to denote 3 dimensional objects (i.e. globe, sphere, planet, etc.).

"He will roll you up tightly like a ball and throw you into a large country. There you will die and there the chariots you were so proud of will become a disgrace to your master’s house." (Isaiah 22:18, NIV)

 

[Mr.Waffles]

"He will roll you up tightly like a ball and throw you into a large country. There you will die and there the chariots you were so proud of will become a disgrace to your master’s house." (Isaiah 22:18, NIV)

Interesting, hadn't caught that verse. I did look it up.
Strong's H1754 - duwr...

(a) a circle, Isaiah 29:3. "as in circle", round about.
(b) a ball, Isaiah 22:18.
(c) a burning pile, a round heap of wood. Ezekiel 24:5.

Note it is "He will roll you up tightly", contextually speaking this word is used to signify "rolling", round/round about. It wouldn't be used to denote a 3 dimensional object (such as a planet), that's why another word is used when Earth is actually mentioned in the Old Testament --> Strong's H2329 - chuwg (circle/circuit/compass). Bear in mind that a single word in the Hebrew can be used in very different ways.

The whole point is that in the original Hebrew language, there aren't words that convey the same meaning as the english words "globe" or "sphere", that's not to say that the original Hebrew was not actually referencing a globe or sphere, it could very well have been, simply using a different kind of word.

 

[Jase]

The whole point is that in the original Hebrew language, there aren't words that convey the same meaning as the english words "globe" or "sphere", that's not to say that the original Hebrew was not actually referencing a globe or sphere, it could very well have been, simply using a different kind of word.

Nope, actually in Hebrew the word used for "Circle of the Earth" refers to a flat, 2 dimensional disk, not a sphere. That had absolutely no way to know the earth was spherical. The reference to covering the Earth with a Tent proves they thought it was flat.

As for Geocentrism, what all the references to an immovable Earth that the Sun revolves around? Why did the Church hold onto Geocentrism for so many Centuries, because Heliocentrism contradicted the Bible?

As I already said you would do, you're manipulating the verses to support your beliefs.