From the article look just posted:
On the first day of the Flood, as the historical record states in Genesis 7:11, "were all the fountains of the great deep broken up" -- the surface of the earth was destroyed -- "and the windows of heaven were opened" -- there was cataclysmic rainfall. Genesis 7:17-24 records in chilling monotony the death of absolutely every air-breathing creature on earth in the Flood. To accomplish such complete and global death, the Flood itself was clearly global and terrible.
With the historical record in Scripture so emphatically demanding that we acknowledge the Flood as a global disaster of unparalleled destruction, how is it possible for anyone to claim the Flood was only local and tranquil? (emphasis mine)
Compare that to this bit from another article look posted in another thread:
Based on his experience with other such bone accumulations, Prestwich believed that the carnivores and herbivores had converged on Santenay to escape a great flood. The rise in water was slow enough for them to get there, yet the height was not sufficient for them to escape. When they perished, their bloated bodies formed a huge mat of carcasses on the surface of the water. Since there was no current to carry them away, some of the decayed and detached parts fell back on Mount Santenay. (emphasis mine)
It's glaring contradictions like these which is precisely why the idea of a recent, global flood was falsified over 200 years ago.
On the first day of the Flood, as the historical record states in Genesis 7:11, "were all the fountains of the great deep broken up" -- the surface of the earth was destroyed -- "and the windows of heaven were opened" -- there was cataclysmic rainfall. Genesis 7:17-24 records in chilling monotony the death of absolutely every air-breathing creature on earth in the Flood. To accomplish such complete and global death, the Flood itself was clearly global and terrible.
With the historical record in Scripture so emphatically demanding that we acknowledge the Flood as a global disaster of unparalleled destruction, how is it possible for anyone to claim the Flood was only local and tranquil? (emphasis mine)
Compare that to this bit from another article look posted in another thread:
Based on his experience with other such bone accumulations, Prestwich believed that the carnivores and herbivores had converged on Santenay to escape a great flood. The rise in water was slow enough for them to get there, yet the height was not sufficient for them to escape. When they perished, their bloated bodies formed a huge mat of carcasses on the surface of the water. Since there was no current to carry them away, some of the decayed and detached parts fell back on Mount Santenay. (emphasis mine)
It's glaring contradictions like these which is precisely why the idea of a recent, global flood was falsified over 200 years ago.
Upvote
0
