Do you believe in a global flood?

[Noaidi]

If people want to regard it as literal, that's fine.

Are you okay with literalists often tying themselves in knots trying to make biblical stories fit current thinking (or vice versa)?

The flood, for example (*trying to stay on topic before a moderator kicks me off*). There is no scientific evidence for a water canopy as extensive as claimed in the bible (i.e. containing the volume of water required to flood the Earth to a depth that covered the highest mountains), yet some will argue for such a canopy, simply because it says so in their book. Doesn't this way of thinking reflect negatively on your religion, often presenting it as rigid and unaccommodating?

 

[kejos]

Are you okay with literalists often tying themselves in knots trying to make biblical stories fit current thinking (or vice versa)?

The flood, for example (*trying to stay on topic before a moderator kicks me off*). There is no scientific evidence for a water canopy as extensive as claimed in the bible (i.e. containing the volume of water required to flood the Earth to a depth that covered the highest mountains), yet some will argue for such a canopy, simply because it says so in their book. Doesn't this way of thinking reflect negatively on your religion, often presenting it as rigid and unaccommodating?

Perhaps that is precisely the effect that these people desire.

But people like that are no part of the church, as far as I am concerned. They are not representatives of the church, because there is only one message that Christians have for others, and that is the gospel of Christ.

 

[Hawkins]

If you believe in the Bible/are a Christian etc, do you believe the flood was world wide or simply localized but appearing worldwide to the then known world? What convinces you either way?

To answer this question, certain assumptions will have to be made.

Under the assumption that planet earth is a very old planet of billions of years, will have to ask how long it persisted our current climate. I last heard that by studying the ice layers (how reliable is that, I know not) in south pole we can estimate that planet earth experienced the most stable climate in the past 30,000 years.

Now have a billion years old planet with 30,000 years of relatively stable climates, then the next question will be "how much we understand catastrophe?!" We have like less than 5000 years of documentation capability and around 500 years of scientific exploration within these stable 30,000. So how much we understand catastrophe, really?!

That said, what appeared to Noah as a flood could be anything, even something we as humans never experienced before.

Now just add in a religious factor,

If God would like to destroy someting, He doesn't need to always use something humans ever know of!

 

[Dirty Penguin]

To answer this question, certain assumptions will have to be made.

No they don't. That is now science works at all.

Under the assumption that planet earth is a very old planet of billions of years

We don't assume the planet is billions of years old. There's an abundance of evidence to substantiate the claim.

will have to ask how long it persisted our current climate. I last heard that by studying the ice layers (how reliable is that, I know not) in south pole we can estimate that planet earth experienced the most stable climate in the past 30,000 years.

Ice core samples are just a fraction of data available as to how we understand climate and the age of the Earth.

Now have a billion years old planet with 30,000 years of relatively stable climates, then the next question will be "how much we understand catastrophe?!"

We understand a great deal about catastrophes. Even in our history it has been witnessed and documented. You're asking a bunch of baseless questions that we have amassed and extraordinary amount of evidence for.

We have like less than 5000 years of documentation capability and around 500 years of scientific exploration within these stable 30,000. So how much we understand catastrophe, really?!

Again, we understand it very well. Question is...How well do you understand catastrophe?

That said, what appeared to Noah as a flood could be anything, even something we as humans never experienced before.

But it wasn't. First, outside your bible, we have no evidence "Noah" existed. That said, as we examine the world around us we have discovered no evidence to suggest a world wide flood in the time line spelled out by various creationist in this thread.

Now just add in a religious factor,

And what's your point? Various societies before, during, and after the supposed flood in your bible had their version of a flood myth. Why should believe the biblical "story" over another?

If God would like to destroy someting, He doesn't need to always use something humans ever know of!

This is utter nonsense. Let's go with your assumption. See, we actually do know what flooding looks like. We've seen it before and know what to look for if this happened on a global scale as your bible explicitly states. We know what destruction and devastation looks like and there is absolutely no data to suggest that the story given actually happened.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

No, I don't believe in a flood. The flood in the Bible is a metaphorical story.

 

[Octavia156]

Yes there was obviously a flood when the Ice Age ended.

It is not a case of belief it is one of scientific fact.

 

[DeitySlayer]

Yes there was obviously a flood when the Ice Age ended.

It is not a case of belief it is one of scientific fact.

The Ice Age ended more than 10,000 years ago, about 4,000 years before the Biblical chronology said the world was created and 6,000 before the alleged date of the Flood. This Flood would also not have released enough water to submerge the entire Earth, so the story of Noah gathering up all the animals, etc. is patently bull.

 

[kejos]

the story of Noah gathering up all the animals, etc. is patently bull.

If understood literally.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

The Ice Age ended more than 10,000 years ago, about 4,000 years before the Biblical chronology said the world was created and 6,000 before the alleged date of the Flood. This Flood would also not have released enough water to submerge the entire Earth, so the story of Noah gathering up all the animals, etc. is patently bull.

I always wondered, if that story is true, how did Noah get all the animals for North America and Japan to the Middle East?

 

[Oberon]

No they don't. That is now science works at all.

Did you mean "that's not how science works at all" ? Because science absolutely works with "certain assumptions."

 

[Hawkins]

No they don't. That is now science works at all.
We don't assume the planet is billions of years old. There's an abundance of evidence to substantiate the claim.

Of course you need to assume. You need assume the following at least,

1) You understand time, mind you time is a space in quantum physics calculation. And in relativity it is not even a stable quantity, speed is. You need to assume that time works in the past as it is now.

2) You need to assume that planet earth is in its current position all the times. Since you can't refute the presence of God, and by the assumption of God's existence, God can plug the earth in its current position any time He wishes. And in that case, you don't even how to apply your dating method.

3) Of course, we need to assume that everything shall work inside a sealed 3D space.

The above is close box or a paradigm for physics laws and the like to work. Physics law and science in general almost exclusively need a paradigm to work within.

Ice core samples are just a fraction of data available as to how we understand climate and the age of the Earth.

That's not the point, how much you understand ice age? or reverting of magnetic poies?

We understand a great deal about catastrophes. Even in our history it has been witnessed and documented. You're asking a bunch of baseless questions that we have amassed and extraordinary amount of evidence for.

Last heard is that we understand nothing about magnetic pole reverting. You over trusted human knowledge I must say.

Again, we understand it very well. Question is...How well do you understand catastrophe?

But it wasn't. First, outside your bible, we have no evidence "Noah" existed. That said, as we examine the world around us we have discovered no evidence to suggest a world wide flood in the time line spelled out by various creationist in this thread.

And what's your point? Various societies before, during, and after the supposed flood in your bible had their version of a flood myth. Why should believe the biblical "story" over another?

This is utter nonsense. Let's go with your assumption. See, we actually do know what flooding looks like. We've seen it before and know what to look for if this happened on a global scale as your bible explicitly states. We know what destruction and devastation looks like and there is absolutely no data to suggest that the story given actually happened.

Your assertion is totally moot and utterly nonsense by the assumption that we understand catastrophe well, while I already pointed out that we don't have a clue about what the pole change will cause, and we know almost nothing about how ice age is formed and disolved other than some hypothesis. Perhaps until next ice age comes we may be able to get more information.

 

[kejos]

I always wondered, if that story is true, how did Noah get all the animals for North America and Japan to the Middle East?

The whole idea is absurd. If the Bible is taken 'literally' (which is actually impossible since it contradicts itself if it is all literal) then the flood took place in c. 2350 BC. Vast quantities of volcanic lava were simultaneously spilled onto the earth's crust, making the oceans boil, and the atmosphere would have become poisonous with fumes. Noah etc. would have needed a spaceship, not an ark. And they would still be in space, waiting for the earth to cool enough to permit an Ice Age or three, to say nothing of waiting for the formation of soils to allow plants to grow to feed the animals in the spaceship.

 

[Octavia156]

The Ice Age ended more than 10,000 years ago, about 4,000 years before the Biblical chronology said the world was created and 6,000 before the alleged date of the Flood. This Flood would also not have released enough water to submerge the entire Earth, so the story of Noah gathering up all the animals, etc. is patently bull.

The Flood story predates Biblical Chronology so I reject that as a valid source. And the animal/ark story is another one of YHVH's jokes

The earliest story of the Flood comes from Sumerian tablets.

There's a few things to consider:

1. Abraham was a Sumarian. Most of Genesis is a reshuffling of Sumerian Mythos, most of the names are borrowed.
2. The Flood described on the tablets is one of historical description - they were written over 5000yrs ago, but they were telling of a then ancient time past.
On the tablet that details the royal line of kings back to the Nephalim, 'Noah' is one of the first tribes..
Whats really interesting is that Adam was one of his descendents.

 

[DeitySlayer]

And still failing to explain where these waters came from, or where they went...

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The flood story is a myth.

 

[Octavia156]

And still failing to explain where these waters came from, or where they went...

It was frozen Ice

It fills the oceans now - FFS you could also walk to America from Africa - thats where the water went - its called the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

Christ people, use yer heads!

 

[Octavia156]

The flood story is a myth.

no smoke without fire :drool:

 

[DeitySlayer]

It was frozen Ice

It fills the oceans now - FFS you could also walk to America from Africa - thats where the water went - its called the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

Christ people, use yer heads!

Right back at you.

It wasn't a global flood then. There was still all the area of the present continents for the animals and humans to run off to. There would be no need for Noah and his little Ark. And if we're talking Bible literalism here, with the Creation, etc. the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans would have to exist to that depth for the survival of deep-sea species such as colossal squid, sperm whales, and bottom feeders. Shallow water bodies would not have provided the 'right' environment for them.

 

[gnostic]

It was frozen Ice

It fills the oceans now - FFS you could also walk to America from Africa - thats where the water went - its called the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

Christ people, use yer heads!

Ice Ages ended 8000 years before Noah, Octavia.

Beside that, there were there were no ice between Africa and the American continent, hence the Atlantic Ocean. The Ice Ages only covered northern America, northern Europe and northern Asia. The whole world wasn't covered in ice, hence you seriously don't know what you are talking about.

 

[rusra02]

The Flood story predates Biblical Chronology so I reject that as a valid source. And the animal/ark story is another one of YHVH's jokes

The earliest story of the Flood comes from Sumerian tablets.

There's a few things to consider:

1. Abraham was a Sumarian. Most of Genesis is a reshuffling of Sumerian Mythos, most of the names are borrowed.
2. The Flood described on the tablets is one of historical description - they were written over 5000yrs ago, but they were telling of a then ancient time past.
On the tablet that details the royal line of kings back to the Nephalim, 'Noah' is one of the first tribes..
Whats really interesting is that Adam was one of his descendents.

You post is riddled with inaccurate statements. The Flood does not predate Bible chronology. It is easy to make unfounded assertions such as "most of Genesis is a reshuffling of Sumerian Mythos."

Here is the Babylonian creation myth:

The god Apsu and the goddess Tiamat made other gods. Later Apsu became distressed with these gods and tried to kill them, but instead he was killed by the god Ea. Tiamat sought revenge and tried to kill Ea, but instead she was killed by Ea’s son Marduk. Marduk split her body in half, and from one half he made the sky and from the other half he made the earth. Then Marduk, with Ea’s aid, made mankind from the blood of another god, Kingu.

Now compare that to the Genesis account of creation. Read it for yourself in Chapters 1 and 2. The statement that this is a reshuffling of sumerian myth is absurd.
Note this quote: “If I as a geologist were called upon to explain briefly our modern ideas of the origin of the earth and the development of life on it to a simple, pastoral people, such as the tribes to whom the Book of Genesis was addressed, I could hardly do better than follow rather closely much of the language of the first chapter of Genesis.” This geologist, Wallace Pratt, also noted that the order of events—from the origin of the oceans, to the emergence of land, to the appearance of marine life, and then to birds and mammals—is essentially the sequence of the principal divisions of geologic time.
​

Neither was Adam a descendent of Noah.

The Flood, far from being a joke, is a warning historical example of how Jehovah will deal with people today who choose to ignore Him.(2 Peter 3:5=7)​