Noah's Ark

[Ave Maria]

Does Noah's Ark have to be taken literally in order for a literal creation of Genesis to be true?

 

[keyarch]

Does Noah's Ark have to be taken literally in order for a literal creation of Genesis to be true?

Scripture is very precise on how words are used. If you just let the words speak for themselves, you will see that the Global Flood and Noah's Ark are to be taken literally. For anyone interested, the following link shows the meaning of those words in context relating to the flood.
www.genesistruth.org/documents/flood.pdf

The account of creation in Genesis is written in a literal sense as well and to taken that way. The biggest problem that I see is when people try and lump the creation of the universe and earth's biology into the same time period (either old or recent). My interpretation is that the universe and core earth are an undetermined old age and the finished earth and ALL the original biology are from a recent six literal day creation and making period about 6,180 years ago. And that there was a global flood that wiped out all the land animals (not sea creatures) except for those contained in the Ark about 2457 B.C. that had catastrophic effects on the geographical features on earth and which altered the sea level (about 400 ft. now) and that soon after caused the ice age. I also believe that the current Global warming and melting of the ice caps is a continuation of the climate's return to it's previous state.

 

[Ave Maria]

I guess you can say that I just have a hard time believing the story of Noah's Ark. Is there any evidence that a worldwide flood ever occurred? Is this evidence recognized by secular scientists?

 

[keyarch]

I guess you can say that I just have a hard time believing the story of

Noah's Ark. Is there any evidence that a worldwide flood ever occurred? Is this evidence recognized by secular scientists?

Many types of evidence can be viewed different ways depending on one's presuppositions and theories, but if you have "FAITH" in God and His Word, you would naturally start with the position that there WAS a global flood unless proven beyond a doubt otherwise (of course then you would have a dilemma regarding the Word). You're always going to get secular scientist that say it didn't happen along with many other things in the Bible (starting with a supernatural creation and a resurrected Christ).

The following are my opinions and beliefs:
For me and my study, I see evidence for a global flood all around the world. Look at all the thousands of feet of "sedimentary" rock that contain biology. This is evidence of a catastrophic event AFTER the earth contained living organisms. These sediments were laid down and eroded with water. If anything, the NATURAL occurring processes create EROSION, not the building of thousand of feet of this kind of material and especially not with the specific kinds of layers we find.

Many don't understand where that water came from to cover the earth. First of all, the Bible says that the earth was covered with water before God brought the land masses to the surface. So the global flood was actually the second time. Then the Bible says that the fountains of the deep opened up. These “fountains” are represented by areas like the mid-Atlantic ridges. Heated water acted like geysers spewing water from the lithosphere into the atmosphere which rained back down. There is enough water below the seas to more than account for enough water to cover the earth. After the year period, the water went back down into the lithosphere via subduction zones. The raised sea level that we now (+400 ft.) have is a result of an unequal amount of water receding and the displacement of water due to the erosion of the continents into the coastal areas.

I also see areas like the Grand Canyon as being eroded in a short period of time when the sediments were still fairly soft, not from a water flow that cut thru rock over millions of years. When the “secular scientist” try to figure out how this canyon formed, a global flood representing how the sediments got there and the possible breaching of water thru soft material after the flood are not even on the table for consideration, because it represents something from a supernatural event which has to be ignored.

 

[Ave Maria]

Thank you keyarch.

 

[SBG]

It would be interesting if science actually tried to falsify evolution, instead of trying to falsify creation.

 

[TheBear]

Sorry folks. I thought I was in the C&E forum.

 

[TheBear]

Sorry folks. I thought I was in the C&E forum.

 

[Ave Maria]

It would be interesting if science actually tried to falsify evolution, instead of trying to falsify creation.

Yes, it would be interesting. I wonder what would happen?

 

[Numenor]

.

 

[keyarch]

Yes, it would be interesting. I wonder what would happen?

Probably nothing. My bet is that the things that are falsified would still remain in the science text books. I.E. Peppered Moths, Miller's Experiment, Haekels embryos, Galapagos finches etc.

 

[Plan 9]

Probably nothing. My bet is that the things that are falsified would still remain in the science text books. I.E. Peppered Moths, Miller's Experiment, Haekels embryos, Galapagos finches etc.

All evolutionary scientists are not to blame for outdated or badly researched textbooks. Some textbook are just plain bad, and not just the ones on this subject.
Are all Christians are responsible when you buy a clunker of a book from a Christian bookstore?

However, if you can prove your assertion by showing me a new, legitimate, school textbook which presents Piltdown Man as anything but a fake, I'd love to see a copy.
Piltdown Man was exposed as a fake by an evolutionist.


btw, I just saw a two hour show on the Galapagos finches. Excavations there have turned up far more species than Darwin knew of. Feel free to debunk them...if you can, please. That's a subject for another thread, of course...

Oh, and Keyarch, you've been invited to participate in another Noah's Ark thread, and I feel sure everyone else will be welcome, too. Whosoever will may come.
http://www.christianforums.com/t1599340-refutation-of-claims-in-noahs-ark-thread-in-co-forum.html

 

[keyarch]

Oh, and Keyarch, you've been invited to participate in another Noah's Ark thread, and I feel sure everyone else will be welcome, too. Whosoever will may come.
http://www.christianforums.com/t1599340-refutation-of-claims-in-noahs-ark-thread-in-co-forum.html

I just check this out and it looks like they are quoting most of what I've said on this thread and making an issue of it. Oh well Thanks for the offer, but I've had enough excitement for one day. It does bother me to know that what is said in this area can be pasted into another area to be ridiculed without defense. Well, now I know. And I have no desire to get into it over there.

 

[Plan 9]

I just check this out and it looks like they are quoting most of what I've said on this thread and making an issue of it. Oh well Thanks for the offer, but I've had enough excitement for one day. It does bother me to know that what is said in this area can be pasted into another area to be ridiculed without defense. Well, now I know. And I have no desire to get into it over there.

From their point of view, you've posted in a place which excludes them, they've invited you to participate, and there's nothing at all private about any message board. If you don't believe me, take a look at this site:
http://users.rcn.com/rostmd/winace/fundies/fstdt_jun03.htm

It wasn't my intention to upset you, keyarch, and I'm sorry I did. Please accept my apology.

 

[sdlvx]

Sister holly what are you thinking???? Science is the devil's tool! You should just ignore those silly scientists are their intellect. The real answer lies in the bumbling idiotic masses we call christians!