Noah's Flood

[pyro214]

*cant move to General Apologetics yet because my post count is low...not many people view this so will see what happens.....might move after 100 posts *

On a seperate thread we ended up getting into a big discussion about Noah's flood...i decided it is a seperate topic in itself so heres where we are at:

As far as i know, the Bible distincly explains that a flood took place on earth....and covered all mountains. I have not yet reseached if it covered the whole world etc... but i would imagine so.

To summarise (very briefly):

EVIDENCE AGAINST A GLOBAL FLOOD:

1. Ice sheets date back to long before the alleged flood, when they would have melted or been floated off.
2. The geologic column contains evidence of surface features (raindrops, footprints etc.) that could not have been deposited had the column been laid down quickly.
3. Freshwater and saltwater organisms both survived the flood, despite the fact that the flood would have radically changed the salinity of the oceans.
4. There is no evidence that two of each "kind" could have repopulated the Earth to the extent we see today in 4000 years.
5. Archaeological remnants dating back before the flood, such as the earliest Egyptian pyramids, show no signs of flooding.
6. Fossil fuel deposits are today found without reference to a flood, but to traditionally accepted theories (involving gradual deposition, not catastrophism).
7. Fossils are arranged according to date, not to ecological niche as would be expected of a sudden laying down of the geologic column.
8. There is no evidence of a flood in tree-ring methods that go back 10,000 years.

Read this article and others like it on the website for more information and - surprise, surprise - yet more evidence against a global flood.

Let's summarise the other side:

EVIDENCE FOR A GLOBAL FLOOD:

1. The Bible says it happened.
2. Um .... that's it.

Unless anyone can come up with any more?

discuss.

 

[FishFace]

I agree with all the above pieces of evidence!

I would add that it needs to be discussed where the water came from, and where it went afterwards, with reference to where the energy came from, and went.

 

[RedAndy]

I agree with all the above pieces of evidence!

I would add that it needs to be discussed where the water came from, and where it went afterwards, with reference to where the energy came from, and went.

Yes, that was quite an oversight on my part not to mention that!

 

[repentant]

Well the Bible says that a flood covered the whole world. By whole world one assumes that they mean. "the whole world". Maybe that wasn't the case. Back then, the whole world to them was a small region. It could have been that it just possibly covered this region. But I don't really know, I have never actually looked into what the Orthodox teaching is on the global flood.

But science is something I try not to look at. God is above science. Afterall He defied science when He came as a Man, and was born of a virgin..

 

[pyro214]

I agree with all the above pieces of evidence!

I would add that it needs to be discussed where the water came from, and where it went afterwards, with reference to where the energy came from, and went.

well if water supassed all mountains then it would be impossible from it to come from earth iself....if it came from underground it would be quiet warm (maybe enough to kill off all swiming creatures)...thus id conclude that both the creation/disaperence of water came from God himself, not impossible.

Truthfully i think if the flood is to be proved wrong by trying to think what happened at the time off....we wont get to far. I think discussing how evidence today against it is more worthwhile.

 

[martymonster]

Common sense would suggest that the writters mean their part of the world!

 

[jwu]

.if it came from underground it would be quiet warm (maybe enough to kill off all swiming creatures)...thus id conclude that both the creation/disaperence of water came from God himself, not impossible.

That has been calculated...actually it wouldn't only be hot, but all that would come from underground would be steam instead of fluid water, scalding everyone to death. Including anyone on an ark.

Truthfully i think if the flood is to be proved wrong by trying to think what happened at the time off....we wont get to far. I think discussing how evidence today against it is more worthwhile.

Ok. One thing that the flood would have to explain is the fossil record. In a young earth scenario, there are only 6000 years for hundreds of metres of sediments to accumulate all over the world. After all, the "lowest" fossils in the earth mark a point which has to have been the surface at some time.

However, it would be a start to identify the strata which supposedly were laid down by the flood. Then we can begin starting to look at the details of these sediments, if they are flood sediments or not, as well as other features in them.

 

[indagroove]

Let's summarise the other side:

EVIDENCE FOR A GLOBAL FLOOD:

1. The Bible says it happened.
2. Um .... that's it.

Unless anyone can come up with any more?

Just that....

• Sedimentary rock is clearly visible near the top of Mt. Everest
• Pillow lava is found at the 14,000 foot level on Mt Ararat (Pillow Lava is formed underwater)
• Marine Fossils are found in the Himalayan Mountains
• The random order and mixing of the fossils
• Massive worldwide coal deposits
• The volume of water on earth is ten times greater than the volume of all land above sea level

The biggest piece of evidence is Written flood legends from all over the world. The fact that there are written records of the great Flood found in hundreds of nations and tribes from all parts of the world is firm evidence that these people groups all originated from the one family preserved through the cataclysm. All of these accounts are similar in one way or another to the Genesis record. The widespread nature of flood accounts throughout the entire human race is excellent evidence for the fact of a worldwide flood from a legal/historical point of view.
Talk Originsa has a collection of every flood story that could be found. Many of them tell the same story. Remember, not all nations and tribes had Internet back then, so that leaves out the collaboration idea

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html

.

 

[jwu]

• Sedimentary rock is clearly visible near the top of Mt. Everest
• Pillow lava is found at the 14,000 foot level on Mt Ararat (Pillow Lava is formed underwater)
• Marine Fossils are found in the Himalayan Mountains

• All explained by plate tectonics.
  

The random order and mixing of the fossils

But they are not random...but nicely ordered. E.g. primates are only found in the cenozoid, no dinosaur fossils past the K/T boundary and so on.

Massive worldwide coal deposits

These actually are a huge problem for a global deluge, as they are way too massive. That much wood couldn*t have existed on the earth all at the same time. Not even nearly.

The volume of water on earth is ten times greater than the volume of all land above sea level

Still it's not nearly enough to cover Mount Everest...it only reaches to *surprise* the current sea level.

The biggest piece of evidence is Written flood legends from all over the world. The fact that there are written records of the great Flood found in hundreds of nations and tribes from all parts of the world is firm evidence that these people groups all originated from the one family preserved through the cataclysm. All of these accounts are similar in one way or another to the Genesis record. The widespread nature of flood accounts throughout the entire human race is excellent evidence for the fact of a worldwide flood from a legal/historical point of view.
Talk Originsa has a collection of every flood story that could be found. Many of them tell the same story. Remember, not all nations and tribes had Internet back then, so that leaves out the collaboration idea

How about cultures who do not have any flood myth? And how come that ancient civilizations like the Egyptians did not notice the global deluge which supposedly happened while they were happily building pyramids?

 

[flatworm]

Just that....

• Sedimentary rock is clearly visible near the top of Mt. Everest
• Pillow lava is found at the 14,000 foot level on Mt Ararat (Pillow Lava is formed underwater)
• Marine Fossils are found in the Himalayan Mountains

None of these things support a global flood model. Water flows downhill, and any sediment it`s carrying goes with it. When is the last time you heard of a landslide going from the bottom of a mountain to the top? Creationists claim an extremely violent flood in order to explain impossible amounts of sediment deposition, but the only source for all this energy would be gravitational potential. Once the flood tops the mountains there would be no more way for such ferocious currents to be generated. If a global flood ever happened, the highest mountaintops should be bare of sediment.

 

[RedAndy]

The biggest piece of evidence is Written flood legends from all over the world. The fact that there are written records of the great Flood found in hundreds of nations and tribes from all parts of the world is firm evidence that these people groups all originated from the one family preserved through the cataclysm. All of these accounts are similar in one way or another to the Genesis record. The widespread nature of flood accounts throughout the entire human race is excellent evidence for the fact of a worldwide flood from a legal/historical point of view.
Talk Originsa has a collection of every flood story that could be found. Many of them tell the same story. Remember, not all nations and tribes had Internet back then, so that leaves out the collaboration idea

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html

.

Yes, but remember that floods are a fairly common occurrence, particularly near rivers where early civilisations tended to spring up. Add to it several generations of exaggeration, and a deflated knowledge of what "the world" actually was, and you have a large number of civilisations, each with their own flood stories. Take a look at the TalkOrigins list - you will see that most of the flood stories are quite different from any of the others. Not only that, but the absence of physical evidence for a flood means that even widespread collaboration on a single flood story (which we don't have) wouldn't be sufficient to "prove" the truth of the story.

 

[WingsOfTheNeophyte]

The actual Bible story is simple plagiarism, from the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh

http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/mesopotamian/gilgamesh/tab11.htm

 

[DailyBlessings]

Plagiarised? Even if we set aside the confused notions of intellectual property misapplied to classical contexts inherent in the accusation, the stories aren't that similar.

 

[artybloke]

Plagiarised? Even if we set aside the confused notions of intellectual property misapplied to classical contexts inherent in the accusation, the stories aren't that similar.

Quite. Not only that, but there is the element of how the Hebrew writers of the flood myth creatively changed the story to reflect their theology.

 

[KCDAD]

The Euphrates floods nearly every year... it is pretty clear to me that this the story of a regional flood, or at its literary and spiritual best it is a morality play about something that EVERY society experienced at one time or another (see New Orleans, 2005) and that is natural catastrophies. We need to read the stories in The Bible for what we can learn about ourselves and our relationships with God and other people, not for the science, history or minutae of the stories themselves.

 

[DailyBlessings]

Quite. Not only that, but there is the element of how the Hebrew writers of the flood myth creatively changed the story to reflect their theology.

And comparing the two stories is actually a good way to study the story and its implications. We can look at the basic cosmology of Mesopotamians as a body of knowledge that everyone at the time accepted- the flat earth, the global flood, times in the past when great kings fought great beasts, etc etc. It is where the Scripture departs from this body of knowledge that we can learn how our spiritual ancestors understood God's interaction with the universe. I love the Old Testament, but suspect a lot of people don't study it very deeply.

 

[pyro214]

Yes, but remember that floods are a fairly common occurrence, particularly near rivers where early civilisations tended to spring up. Add to it several generations of exaggeration, and a deflated knowledge of what "the world" actually was, and you have a large number of civilisations, each with their own flood stories.

yea but why would they pass on a story about a river overflowing.....it had to be somthing more.

Take a look at the TalkOrigins list - you will see that most of the flood stories are quite different from any of the others. Not only that, but the absence of physical evidence for a flood means that even widespread collaboration on a single flood story (which we don't have) wouldn't be sufficient to "prove" the truth of the story.

people have differnt ways of interpeting things, and like you said....it was passed on generation by generation so the chances of the story staying the same is slim. The fact that such a story about "a river overlowing" doesnt make sense, it would have to be a massive flood.

The actual Bible story is simple plagiarism, from the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh

http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/mesopotamian/gilgamesh/tab11.htm

ill start by asking how do you know which came first?

Quite. Not only that, but there is the element of how the Hebrew writers of the flood myth creatively changed the story to reflect their theology.

The Bible states, every word is through the breath of God. The Bible also states that to add or take away a single word of the Bible would corrupt it. (parents have told me both in past, ill look up specific verses).
Because of this i think that the Bible is not a bunch of interpetions, its written the way it is...and was never intended to be any differnt.

 

[WingsOfTheNeophyte]

ill start by asking how do you know which came first?

Simple, let me put a link to where I explained it in detail, I can be bothered doing it all over again

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=30524357&postcount=5

Here, clearly it is shown that the epic among other Sumerian texts came first

 

[RealSorceror]

I just had a thought.
Didn't the flood supposedly cover all landforms, including the tips of the mountains?
Considering the hieght of Mt. Everest, wouldn't everything in the Ark die at that altitude?
The cold alone would kill almost anything, not to mention the lack of oxygen.

 

[pyro214]

I just had a thought.
Didn't the flood supposedly cover all landforms, including the tips of the mountains?
Considering the hieght of Mt. Everest, wouldn't everything in the Ark die at that altitude?
The cold alone would kill almost anything, not to mention the lack of oxygen.

good point,
this is where people might say that by "the whole world", the writer ment only a small portion of "what was known of the world from his perspective at the time". Mountains at his location may not of been as high...definatly a topic in itself open for discussion.