youngh earth local flood

[myways]

does anyone here believe young earth and local flood?

--dave

 

[Sphinx777]

The story of a Great Flood (also known as the Deluge) sent by a deity or deities to destroy civilization as an act of divine retribution is a widespread theme among many cultural myths. Though it is best known in modern times through the Biblical story of Noah's Ark, it is also well known in other versions, such as stories of Matsya in the Hindu Puranas, Deucalion in Greek mythology and Utnapishtim in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

 

[myways]

Spynx:
And therfore what?

 

[Sphinx777]

Spynx:
And therfore what?

Precisely...

 

[myways]

so are you saying the flood was global or local?

 

[Sphinx777]

so are you saying the flood was global or local?

Or... what?

Perspective is key...

 

[FallingWaters]

I am a Young Earth Creationist.
I believe Noah's Flood was NOT local for this reason:
God promised He would never again Flood the whole earth as He did in Noah's day,
yet there have been many local floods since that time.
I believe God is keeping His word, and not flooding the whole earth as He did in Noah's day,
though he does allow local floods to occur.

 

[myways]

Falling waters:
Perspective is key. The flood did cover the whole earth from the perspective of the floods victims. In Noah's day, the word 'earth' described a place, not a large round object. Therefore, a local flood could in that sense cover the whole earth.

And, God's promise to never send such a flood again is a promise to never send a flood that kills everyone, it has nothing to do with the size of the event

--dave

 

[myways]

Seriously, the next time you go to the zoo find out hw many people it takes to feed the animals and clean the cages. It is outrageous to think that Noah and his family could keep up with a job at least ten times as large as the world's biggest zoo. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[FallingWaters]

So you started this thread so you could disabuse people of their point of view.
Thanks. That's special.

 

[myways]

I've diverted my focus to deal with the responces that I've been getting. My main intent was to see weather belief in a local flood is percieved to be contradictory to YEC. That's all. So what do you think fallingwaters, are there others who share my view or do I have to go to the old earth side?

--dave

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish2]

does anyone here believe young earth and local flood?

--dave

Umm.. no, the reason.. as Kend Hovind said.. God would just tell Noah to move..

 

[myways]

I don't think that's a better alternative cause Noah had to stay around to preach. It takes more faith to build an enormous boat while people make fun of you than to just leave.

 

[myways]

the important part of the flood story is how it represents the Gospel not how thriftily God saved Noah

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish2]

I don't think that's a better alternative cause Noah had to stay around to preach. It takes more faith to build an enormous boat while people make fun of you than to just leave.

what's the point of building the ark then, he could have preached up till the last minutes, then left.

 

[myways]

I don't think your line of reasoning is very conclusive. You're saying that if the flood was local, then God would have deemed it wiser to save Noah and the animals by simple relocation than by the ark. That seems like heavy speculation. I don't think a global flood story can hold up to scrutiny. There's just too many animals in the world for them to have all fit practically on the ark.

--dave

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish2]

i think it happened. and i think they found the ark, already. The animals didn't have to be fully grown, and there was a mass extincion anyway at that time. I think that there is a lot of evidence for dinosaur survival.. one example is Beowolf and Grendel.. another thing is that the text says to take onboard animals that breath using lungs, and not animals that suck air in through tubes in the body, so those people that say 'what about the x number of species of insects? they haven't studied the text.. and what about the fish, fresh water fish being dumped into the sea, how did they survive in salt water?.. answer; the sea wasn't salty. That built up later, after the changed conditions after the flood.. the world wasn't like that before the flood, it was totally different.
People ask... 'what did the flood achieve?' and how could God do such a thing?.. there are reasons, and i have my own views.. it was because of the Nephilim. That happened again after the flood, and that's why there was ethnic cleansing during the invasion of Palestine, by the thug Joshua.

 

[myways]

I agree about the types of animals brought on th ark and that they in many cases could have been immature etc. But still this has to be alot of feeding and pooping for Noah to have to deal with. Second, how did such a vast number of the invertabrates not includid on the ark end up surviving the flood?

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish2]

I agree about the types of animals brought on th ark and that they in many cases could have been immature etc. But still this has to be alot of feeding and pooping for Noah to have to deal with. Second, how did such a vast number of the invertabrates not includid on the ark end up surviving the flood?

i think they survived in the vegetation mass, floating in the water, but not sure, the cycle of mosquitoes etc. is short, so don't really know. There was a hole running down the length of the ark, it allowed for an air conditioning, with the movement of the waves, up and down, and all the muck could be swept out. There were drogue stones set around the ark.. these are oval shaped stones with a hole in the top, that absorb the storm action, and these stones were found on the hills, where they found the ark, and are still there, with inscriptions of various christians that found them, and knew what they were. When i saw these stones in a book, many years ago, I thought 'so there really was an ark?'. One thing i'm not sure about is the rivers, as mentioned in Genesis, if these are the same rivers, as before the flood, or just re-named after rivers that were known before. There's some wording evidence that they are the same rivers, if you look at the text closely. But others say that the whole world geography was changed totally. I am thinking of this of late.. that perhaps the garden of Eden was somewhere else, other than Armenia, and that the Ark just happened to end up there, and hence the Mesopotamian civilisation that followed, as the first post flood civilisations. But other areas like Egypt, the sphinx and other stones showing that it was a pre-flood monument, not the only one.. Tiahuanaco in Bolivia is, me thinks another pre-flood city.. what's it doing up there in the mountains? evidence shows that it was once a port-city. And Baalbek as well.
I'm reading now about 'Mu'.. this was an area of land, that was west of India, joining India, and extending out from Tamil, into what is now sea. I think that most of the surface of the earth was land, with fresh water seas, before the flood. Most of it covered in forest, and no deserts. That's why some people are perplexed by the sphinx.. as it shows water erosion.. and is probably much older than dated now. The flood washed all the trees (which were much bigger then) into a huge pile of logs and vegetation, a lot of it was then covered with silt, that came up from the ground, through fissures in the earths mantle/crust. That's what formed the coal. And also that's why pre-flood artifacts have been found in coal. I have thought of late.. what's the logic/reason, for saying that dinosaurs lived 200 million years ago? where's the proof? It was all thought up as a theory, and now a fairly dumb theory, that reptiles evolved into amphibians etc.. with no proof or even evidence for it.. how do you date fossils? by the rocks that they'r in.. and how do you date the rocks? ..by the fossils in 'em.

i found this video last night on you-tube.. there's a statue shown of Nimrod.. he's got a lion in his arms, .. Nimrod was a dodgy character from Mesopotamia.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...&ei=PBUbSfj0B6bg2gLlsazNAw&q=is+paris+satanic

 

[Van]

I am unsure just what the idea of a "local" flood might be. Say an ice age ends abruptly after the creation of man. The ocean level rises and huge amounts of run-off occur. So you could have world wide flooding yet not all land covered with water. Is that a "local" flood? Lots of folks living near the water would be wiped out, and world wide "stories" of a great flood would be common to many isolated cultures. Is that the idea of a "local" flood.