Global Flood?

[Calypsis4]

Find a single passage in the Bible in which the phrase 'the whole heaven' does not refer to the entire globe of the earth.

Below I have listed every single passage in the Bible that contains that phrase.

Gen 7:21 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

De 2:25 This day will I begin to put the dread of thee and the fear of thee upon the nations that are under the whole heaven, who shall hear report of thee, and shall tremble, and be in anguish because of thee.

De 4:19 And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.

Job 28:24 For he looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under the whole heaven;



Job 37:3 He directeth it under the whole heaven, and his lightning unto the ends of the earth.

Job 41:11 ¶ Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him? whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine.

Da 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

Da 9:12 And he hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem.

Not only so but the N.T. reveals clearly the flood was universal and that all life on earth except Noah's family were destroyed by it:

"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water." I Peter 3:20

It was clear from the Gen. 6 that God intended to destroy the whole world

"And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them." 6:7

...and it is exceedingly clear that HE did just that...and not just in one location:

"And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

Any other position is wickedness and unbelief.

Yet, some professing believers in our society still have trouble believing that Noah's flood destroyed the whole world...despite the evidence.

Why?

 

[Assyrian]

Find a single passage in the Bible in which the phrase 'the whole heaven' does not refer to the entire globe of the earth.

Below I have listed every single passage in the Bible that contains that phrase.

Gen 7:21 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

De 2:25 This day will I begin to put the dread of thee and the fear of thee upon the nations that are under the whole heaven, who shall hear report of thee, and shall tremble, and be in anguish because of thee.

De 4:19 And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.

Job 28:24 For he looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under the whole heaven;



Job 37:3 He directeth it under the whole heaven, and his lightning unto the ends of the earth.

Job 41:11 ¶ Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him? whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine.

Da 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

Da 9:12 And he hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem.

I have high lighted it for you, the very next reference after the flood. It wasn't the Incas or Mauri who trembled in fear because of Moses, the nations under the whole heaven who trembles in anguish were the Edomites, Moabites and Canaanites.

Not only so but the N.T. reveals clearly the flood was universal and that all life on earth except Noah's family were destroyed by it:

"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water." I Peter 3:20

Where does that say the flood was global? It says eight peopel were saved from the flood, not that the flood covered the whole planet.

It was clear from the Gen. 6 that God intended to destroy the whole world

"And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them." 6:7

...and it is exceedingly clear that HE did just that...and not just in one location:

"And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

Given that in Hebrew, the earth, erets, normally refers to a specific region, a land, this is a really good description of a devastating local flood.

Any other position is wickedness and unbelief.

Because Jesus commanded his disciple to go into the whole world and preach a six day creation and global flood. Or are you binding the people of God with made up laws and condemnations?

Yet, some professing believers in our society still have trouble believing that Noah's flood destroyed the whole world...despite the evidence.

Why?

And yet despite this clear proof of a global flood, Sydney and Canberra are quite dry. I wonder how San Francisco and Seattle are doing.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

The evidence of the titanic effects of the flood of Noah are seen in the entire world:

Australian outback.

American west.

More of the American west.

The Gobi desert.

North Africa.

All this proves is a geologic certainty: that all land masses that are pushed up above sea level are immediately and continuously subject to weathering and erosion. This has been going on for millions of years since plate tectonic activity thrust the first land mass up above the waves.

Thank goodness plate tectonic forces are still active and continue to push up new mountains- otherwise, we'd all be under water or living on boats.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

This individual said that they were NOT clams.

Credibility lost.

Oh? More so than you who has not yet produced a single peer reviewed scientific paper showing that these "giant clams" are fossils, and not concretions or some other erosion feature?

Are you a graduate earth scientist with a recognized degree, or just someone who thinks that they know more than those who do have these credentials?

I bet you also believe that this is a picture of Noah's Arc:

 

[Mallon]

Oh? More so than you who has not yet produced a single peer reviewed scientific paper showing that these "giant clams" are fossils, and not concretions or some other erosion feature?

Just thinking more about these supposed giant clam fossils (I'm not convinced they're not concretions, either... they don't show the same fluting of the aperture as modern giant clams)...
Modern giant clams take 100 years to reach the sizes shown in C4's photo. If these things really did flourish on mountain tops during the course of Noah's flood, is C4 really advocating that they reached full size in less than a year??? Maybe the miraculous flood also imposed miraculous growth rates in giant clams...

Oh yeah, and if you don't believe it, you're an infidel.

 

[Calypsis4]

Oh? More so than you who has not yet produced a single peer reviewed scientific paper showing that these "giant clams" are fossils, and not concretions or some other erosion feature?

Are you a graduate earth scientist with a recognized degree, or just someone who thinks that they know more than those who do have these credentials?

I bet you also believe that this is a picture of Noah's Arc:

Nope, that's not the ark. Not even close.

Me, a scientist? Aw shucks folks, I'm flattered.:o

Second. Yup, them there clams jes climbed two miles up the side O that there mountain...right folks?

 

[Calypsis4]

All this proves is a geologic certainty: that all land masses that are pushed up above sea level are immediately and continuously subject to weathering and erosion. This has been going on for millions of years since plate tectonic activity thrust the first land mass up above the waves.

Thank goodness plate tectonic forces are still active and continue to push up new mountains- otherwise, we'd all be under water or living on boats.

Yeah, folks, and he's got EYEWITNESSES who observed all that there millions of years of gee-ooo-loooggg-i-cull evilushun!

If you don't bu-leeve that then just ask him for names. He'll be sure and list all the names fer ya.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
.....

So be sure an get yerself edeecated on the matter!

 

[Calypsis4]

It was judgementalism and condemnation from creationist preachers that convinced me creationism did not speak for the Spirit of Christ. Matt 12:7 If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.

Either that or your 'atom bombs' can't stand up to any examination. If Mallon's replies were that dumb or twisted, you should be able to show where the holes are. As it is, Mallon is the one showing all the holes in your arguments. Now you may think he must be wrong because you are convinced all your arguments are such atom bombs. But you are the one who can't support your arguments. It is not enough that you convinced yourself, you need arguments that stand scrutiny

Hmm,is this why he took on the name 'Assyrian'.

 

[Calypsis4]

I have high lighted it for you, the very next reference after the flood. It wasn't the Incas or Mauri who trembled in fear because of Moses, the nations under the whole heaven who trembles in anguish were the Edomites, Moabites and Canaanites.

Where does that say the flood was global? It says eight peopel were saved from the flood, not that the flood covered the whole planet.

Given that in Hebrew, the earth, erets, normally refers to a specific region, a land, this is a really good description of a devastating local flood.


Because Jesus commanded his disciple to go into the whole world and preach a six day creation and global flood. Or are you binding the people of God with made up laws and condemnations?

And yet despite this clear proof of a global flood, Sydney and Canberra are quite dry. I wonder how San Francisco and Seattle are doing.

1. Let him name all the tribes of the earth that existed at that time in history...THEN he might have an argument. I assure you he doesn't even know them nor does anyone else for that matter.

2. "where does that say the flood was global?"

That's like asking 'where does the Bible say the world was created in six days?

Learn the lesson young Christian friends and honest inquirers....this is what the sin of unbelief does to 'professing' Christians. I gave the scriptures but he doesn't believe them.

3. I answered the 'erets' argument long ago but he doesn't care. Any honest inquirer that wants that explained then all they need do is just ask and I will cover it again. (Note: There are at least five posters in this section that don't qualify.)

4. The Lord commanded us to go preach the gospel, yes...but that gospel includes the fact that Jesus is the way....the TRUTH...and the life. What Jesus said about creation and the flood was the TRUTH and exactly what Moses taught: a six-day creation (Exodus 20:11) and a world-wide flood that destroyed ALL men and animal life on the whole earth. Gen. 7:21.

Anything less is unbelief and sin before God.

Noah's flood covered the ENTIRE earth....

And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

Is there a theistic evolutionist under the whole heavens who knows what 'exceedingly' means?

 

[Dark_Lite]

You might want to throw some creationists in there too, because there OECs (and some YECs) who don't think there was a world-wide flood. I'm sure they fall into your Evil Bin along with the rest of us.

 

[Mallon]

It was judgementalism and condemnation from creationist preachers that convinced me creationism did not speak for the Spirit of Christ. Matt 12:7 If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.

Hard to believe C4 is a pastor, eh? You'd think they would bear the fruits of the spirit.

 

[Calypsis4]

Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness. - Jesus.

Dark lite

 

[Calypsis4]

Hard to believe C4 is a pastor, eh? You'd think they would bear the fruits of the spirit.

And his words of kindness are the fruits of the Spirit?

Let the readers decide.

 

[Mallon]

And his words of kindness are the fruits of the Spirit?

Are you trying to excuse your judgmental disposition by pointing to the sins of others? That sounds like something a Pharisee would do.

 

[Calypsis4]

To the other readers: The SCRIPTURE condemns their unbelief and did so long before I repeated it on this website.

5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

The judgment was universal THEN and it will be universal at Christ's return.

We were clearly told that there would be those who deny both the coming of the Lord and Noah's flood that destroyed the entire world. There is no surprise at this at all.

Now. Would someone else besides those who have compromised with evil like to have an opinion?

 

[Assyrian]

1. Let him name all the tribes of the earth that existed at that time in history...THEN he might have an argument. I assure you he doesn't even know them nor does anyone else for that matter.

Him?

It is very clear from Exodus to Deuteronomy who the nations were that trembled at the report of Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt. Exodus 15:14 The peoples have heard; they tremble; pangs have seized the inhabitants of Philistia.
15 Now are the chiefs of Edom dismayed; trembling seizes the leaders of Moab; all the inhabitants of Canaan have melted away.
16 Terror and dread fall upon them; because of the greatness of your arm, they are still as a stone, till your people, O LORD, pass by, till the people pass by whom you have purchased.
These were the nations under the whole heaven who heard the report of Moses and trembled in anguish. And it is here we can learn that that the phrase under the whole heaven can simply mean from horizon to horizon.

2. "where does that say the flood was global?"

That's like asking 'where does the Bible say the world was created in six days?

Learn the lesson young Christian friends and honest inquirers....this is what the sin of unbelief does to 'professing' Christians. I gave the scriptures but he doesn't believe them.

So instead of being able to back up your argument and show that you weren't simply reading your idea of a global flood into a passage which says nothing of the sort, you accuse me of unbelief and being a professing in inverted commas believer.

It is the problem you have with Mallon. You cannot back up you arguements, and when challenged to do so all you can come up with is insult and condemnation.

3. I answered the 'erets' argument long ago but he doesn't care. Any honest inquirer that wants that explained then all they need do is just ask and I will cover it again. (Note: There are at least five posters in this section that don't qualify.)

I think our honest inquirers know how good your answers are.

4. The Lord commanded us to go preach the gospel, yes...but that gospel includes the fact that Jesus is the way....the TRUTH...and the life. What Jesus said about creation and the flood was the TRUTH and exactly what Moses taught: a six-day creation (Exodus 20:11) and a world-wide flood that destroyed ALL men and animal life on the whole earth. Gen. 7:21.

Jesus didn't teach a six day creation or a world wide flood. You need to be careful not to read your interpretations of the Old Testament as what Jesus must have believed too. Especially if you are going to start condemning peopel for not interpreting scripture the way you do.

Anything less is unbelief and sin before God.

Yeah, like that.

Noah's flood covered the ENTIRE earth....

Not sure how these beautiful photos of the earth's oceans are supposed to show there was a global flood.

Is there a theistic evolutionist under the whole heavens who knows what 'exceedingly' means?[/quote]It means greatly, not globally. It was the land Noah came from, the erets, that was covered by these tumultuous waves so that all the high hill in the land, from horizon to horizon in an area that could be the size of all Edom, Philistia, Moab and Canaan, were covered by water.

 

[Calypsis4]

Anyone else? I would rather communicate with those who are not committed to Darwinism over scripture.

 

[Mallon]

Anyone else? I would rather communicate with those who are not committed to Darwinism over scripture.

If you only want to hear from people who agree with you, why don't you go post in the creationism subforum? Here, criticism is fair game.

 

[Happy Hearts Club]

I want to present two things, but reflect the same general idea, that I think indicate that a global flood is not in view in Genesis. The points here are that there are specific people/groups besides Noah and his family that survive the flood. The first is the Nephilim who we run across just prior to the rain (Gen 6) and who also are living in the land after the Exodus (Num 13). The second is the survival of descendents of Cain. We run into the Cainites in several places after the flood (Gen 15, Num 24, Judg 1, Judg 4, 1 Sam 15, 1 Sam 27, 1 Sam 30) who are seen wandering the Negev region just as Genesis 4 said the descendents of Cain would be wanderers. The survival of these 2 groups of people should be an indication that the flood was not global in the way we think of it. There were people other than Noah and his family who survived.

"...And all flesh died that moved on the earth: birds and cattle and beasts and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, and every man. All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, all that was on the dry land, died. So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who were with him in the ark remained alive."
(Gen 7:21-23)

 

[Papias]

Caly gave my response here:
Papias wrote (back in March the last time Caly posted these same hoaxes, http://www.christianforums.com/t7426528-27/#post54272977):

"Take a look at the leaf Calypsis posted. I think it is most consistent with a flat leaf fossil which has been cut by a saw, and the lines that calypsis called "varves" are saw marks. That would explain why they are straight (compare with the other varve image), and of the same thickness (real varves vary in thickness - also compare with the other varve image). Lastly, the saw marks can be seen to have abraded the top surface of leaf as well, that's why the top half is a different color than the bottom half."

and in response, Caly wrote:

That is mere opinion and not any documentations or definitive analysis giving proof that the fossil leaf is a fake or a fraud.

I reject that opinion and so should any honest reader.

Caly, it's not an opinion, it's the straight observations of the "item" you posted. Here are some observations;

1. Leaves settle flat in water. You can see that for yourself on many walks outside in the autumn. Because of this, varves would be at 90 degrees to your supposed varves in that photo.
2. Caly's alleged varves don't continue down the whole sample. That makes no sense. Caly, are you saying that only the top half are varves, and the bottom half has been erased by space aliens or something?
3. Varves vary in thickness with weather changes, while the supposed "varves" of caly are all the same thickness, ....... oddly, just like saw marks. Here are some real varves for comparison:
   
4. Caly's leaf "just happens" to be abraded right along where the "varves" are, suspiciously just like one would expect if the "varves" were saw marks, which would have also abraded the leaf.
5. Real varves are made of particles of different sizes, hence the difference in settling speed. Caly, do you have a paper (from an actual, peer reviewed journal, or at least from a real scientific institute) identifying these?

I could go on. Caly, since you are claiming that my statements are just "opinion", would you like to explain the verifiable observations you have to support your point, and why my observations are "opinion"?

Samples like this happen often when people are looking for fossil in layered rock like shale. A saw cuts a "starter groove", which is then pried open to expose the fossils between the layers. Apparently, someone thought that some people would be gullible enough to think the saw marks were varves. Caly, do you have any observations that don't fit that scenario?

Worse, the rest of your examples are truly laughable. Come on, you gave us the "petrified finger", the "excalibur hammer" and the say they are supported by "metaphysical dating". Caly, what is "metaphysical dating"? Do you, or even the sources you cite, have any idea what you are talking about? These, like your saw marks, have been repeatedly exposed as hoaxes. It does not reflect well on the character and integrity of some creationists who are shown that these are hoaxes, and who then bring them up again when they think they won't get caught. These are what people see when they wonder what it means to be Christian. And we wonder why literally thousands of people leave Christianity every day in the United States alone......


Papias