Evidences Supporting the Biblical Flood

[Dan From Smithville]

This is pretty interesting and describes the evidence that there was no WW flood.

Yes, Noah's Flood May Have Happened, But Not Over the Whole Earth

That is, no multiple worldwide climatic conditions are described in which flooding, then drying to a dry earth, more flooding, more drying to a dry earth, in repeated cycles that occur over and over again in that Flood year. On that basis, it is logical that all the kinds of evaporite deposits and red beds in many different levels in the supposed Noachian Flood deposits could form only in local climates with desert drying-conditions and could not possibly have formed all at the same time — a time when a flood covered the whole earth for more than one year (Collins 2006). On that basis, the Noachian Flood story cannot describe a whole-earth flood, but it could only represent a large regional flood.

Regional Evidence for the Noachian and Similar Floods
Two rivers, the Euphrates and Tigris flow through Mesopotamia, which is now the country of Iraq (Figure 1). There are several layers in exposed rocks near these two rivers in southeastern Mesopotamia (Iraq) that are likely flood deposits.

Most are about a foot (0.3 m) thick, but one is as much as 3 meters thick (MacDonald 1988). Flood debris from this same thick deposit along the Euphrates River near the ancient Sumerian city of Shuruppak about 200 km southeast of Baghdad has been dated by the C14 method, giving an age of 2900 BCE (Best nd).

Flood deposits 2.4 meters feet thick are also reported by MacDonald (1988) as far northeast as the ancient Babylonian city of Kish (120 km south of Baghdad). At any rate, the many flood-deposit layers show that flooding in southeastern Mesopotamia was not unusual in ancient times.

Large local or regional flooding is the most reasonable source of the Genesis flood and older flood myths. It may even be that something like the Black Sea deluge hypothesis describes a tremendous regional flood event that entered oral tradition and later was subsumed by biblical authors as the source of the Genesis flood story.

 

[sooda]

Large local or regional flooding is the most reasonable source of the Genesis flood and older flood myths. It may even be that something like the Black Sea deluge hypothesis describes a tremendous regional flood event that entered oral tradition and later was subsumed by biblical authors as the source of the Genesis flood story.

The problem with the Black Sea flood is that it was slow moving and there was plenty of time to move family and livestock to higher ground. The timetable also supports the rapid dispersal of farming and farming technology into other places.

Geologists Link Black Sea Deluge To Farming's Rise - The ...
https://www.nytimes.com/1996/12/17/science/geologists-link-black-sea-deluge-to-farming...
Dec 17, 1996 · Geologists Link Black Sea Deluge To Farming's Rise. The relentless waters encroached on the land at a rate of half a mile to a mile a day. More than 60,000 square miles of land were soon submerged, a 30 percent expansion in the Black Sea's size, which essentially gave the body of water its modern configuration.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The problem with the Black Sea flood is that it was slow moving and there was plenty of time to move family and livestock to higher ground. The timetable also supports the rapid dispersal of farming and farming technology into other places.

There are issues I have been reading about that challenge the BSf hypothesis. Doubts about sustained water flow, and the geomorphology of the Bospurus are a couple of points that do not fit with the hypothesis.

Any local/regional flood would need to be rapid and catastrophic on a level that would make it seem like the end of the world as it was known at the time.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The problem with the Black Sea flood is that it was slow moving and there was plenty of time to move family and livestock to higher ground. The timetable also supports the rapid dispersal of farming and farming technology into other places.

Geologists Link Black Sea Deluge To Farming's Rise - The ...
https://www.nytimes.com/1996/12/17/science/geologists-link-black-sea-deluge-to-farming...
Dec 17, 1996 · Geologists Link Black Sea Deluge To Farming's Rise. The relentless waters encroached on the land at a rate of half a mile to a mile a day. More than 60,000 square miles of land were soon submerged, a 30 percent expansion in the Black Sea's size, which essentially gave the body of water its modern configuration.

I have been enjoying reading your thread on the history of Genesis. There is a lot of cultural contamination that has taken place throughout history. I had not thought of it as a means to retain ancient wisdom, but that idea makes some sense and reminds me of something I read in David Montgomery's book "The Rocks Don't Lie".

 

[sooda]

There are issues I have been reading about that challenge the BSf hypothesis. Doubts about sustained water flow, and the geomorphology of the Bospurus are a couple of points that do not fit with the hypothesis.

Any local/regional flood would need to be rapid and catastrophic on a level that would make it seem like the end of the world as it was known at the time.

I think so too.

 

[sooda]

I have been enjoying reading your thread on the history of Genesis. There is a lot of cultural contamination that has taken place throughout history. I had not thought of it as a means to retain ancient wisdom, but that idea makes some sense and reminds me of something I read in David Montgomery's book "The Rocks Don't Lie".

Thank you.

Ex-Christadelphians: The Pagan Origins of the Book of Genesis - Part 1: The Spirit of God

The Pagan Origins of the Book of Genesis - Part 1: The Spirit of God

This is the first of a series of articles showing how the authors of the Biblical book of Genesis borrowed many of their key themes and stories from writings of pagan priests and storytellers of the surrounding nations of the Ancient Near East (ANE).

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I think so too.

That and it would have to have survivors that saw natural events as punishment from God.

Since all those variables were in place, it seems the only real question is which flood was it and exactly when it happened. We probably will never know for certain, but the fact that very large floods happened in the area may be enough for those not biased by a desire for a literal reading of the event.

 

[RedhorseWoman]

It is pretty hard to cover a "high mountain" without a worldwide flood. Of course I once argued with a KJV only Christian that thought that the original mountains were only 15 cubits high.

That "small mountain" argument is something I've run into myself, as well, when debating on the former Topix forum. What a JW stated at that time was that the mountains were very small and only became the mountains we see today as a result of the Flood, when water that had been underneath the earth's crust was pushed out to augment the water that was in the "canopy" covering the earth, so that the crust collapsed in various areas causing deep valleys and heaving up mountains as we know them today.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That "small mountain" argument is something I've run into myself, as well, when debating on the former Topix forum. What a JW stated at that time was that the mountains were very small and only became the mountains we see today as a result of the Flood, when water that had been underneath the earth's crust was pushed out to augment the water that was in the "canopy" covering the earth, so that the crust collapsed in various areas causing deep valleys and heaving up mountains as we know them today.

Creationists say the craziest things.

 

[RedhorseWoman]

Most creationists do not seem to understand that killing everything under heaven would include all sea life, all plants, everything. If it was not on the ark, then it was gone, so where did all the plants come from after the flood subsided? Who knows. How did an olive manage to survive when it was stated that all things would be wiped out? Who knows.

Taking this as literal is a dead end.

I've frequently suggested a test that Flood apologists could try that, if successful, would give them (I believe) a very good argument to use to support their beliefs, but for some reason, none of them has ever attempted it or even acknowledged it. I guess they know exactly how things would turn out and it would not help their case at all.

I've suggested that they take a plant and put it in a large bucket that they should then fill with briny water and place the bucket in a dark place (simulating the conditions plants would face if covered by briny water deep enough to cover mountains, which would be dark, indeed) and leave it there for about a year. Then they should take that plant out of the bucket and let us know its condition. Somehow, I highly doubt that any plant would survive submersion in briny water for even a day or two, and it certainly wouldn't be producing either fruit or flowers immediately after being removed from its dark, watery prison.

 

[Faithofchristian]

What are these other references? Do they mention them being millions of years In the past?

It's not hard to figure it out, seeing that in the first flood nothing was saved alive.

Unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people and animals saved alive.

But in the first flood of water nothing survived everything was destroyed.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Well, post some of those references.

How's about the book of Jeremiah, here everything was destroyed, unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people and animals saved alive,
But in the first flood nothing survived.
Everything Perished.

All recorded in Jeremiah, Ezekiel,Isaiah,
2 Peter. Revelation.Genesis

This is what happens, people not realizing that there was more than the flood of Noah's. That's supported in the Bible.

The flood of water that 2 Peter 3:6-7 is speaking about is not the flood of Noah's.

Here in 2 Peter 3:6-7, you'll find everything Perished, that nothing survived,
Unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people and animals that survived the flood of Noah's.

So you know 2 Peter is not speaking about the flood of Noah's.
In the book of Jeremiah you'll find that no man was found in this flood of water, Unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people that were saved alived.
So you know Jeremiah is not speaking about the flood of Noah's.
But the first flood of water that covered the whole earth which happen about a million years ago, which destroyed the dinosaurs and all plant life upon the earth.

When it comes to people, they have no clue or idea about the first flood that's written in the Bible.
I have no doubt that you probably read about it, but didn't realize what you were reading about, but mistakingly it for the flood of Noah's.

Keep in mind that the flood of Noah's, 8 people and animals survived.

But in all those other books that I given above, nothing survived, but everything Perished.

Perished means cease to exist, So it is that everything in the first flood of water,
Perished, cease to exist, gone forever.

 

[sooda]

How's about the book of Jeremiah, here everything was destroyed, unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people and animals saved alive,
But in the first flood nothing survived.
Everything Perished.

All recorded in Jeremiah, Ezekiel,Isaiah,
2 Peter. Revelation

Go ahead and post the chapters and verses.

 

[sooda]

How's about the book of Jeremiah, here everything was destroyed, unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people and animals saved alive,
But in the first flood nothing survived.
Everything Perished.

All recorded in Jeremiah, Ezekiel,Isaiah,
2 Peter. Revelation.Genesis

This is what happens, people not realizing that there was more than the flood of Noah's. That's supported in the Bible.

The flood of water that 2 Peter 3:6-7 is speaking about is not the flood of Noah's.

Here in 2 Peter 3:6-7, you'll find everything Perished, that nothing survived,
Unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people and animals that survived the flood of Noah's.

So you know 2 Peter is not speaking about the flood of Noah's.
In the book of Jeremiah you'll find that no man was found in this flood of water, Unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people that were saved alived.
So you know Jeremiah is not speaking about the flood of Noah's.
But the first flood of water that covered the whole earth which happen about a million years ago, which destroyed the dinosaurs and all plant life upon the earth.

When it comes to people, they have no clue or idea about the first flood that's written in the Bible.
I have no doubt that you probably read about it, but didn't realize what you were reading about, but mistakingly it for the flood of Noah's.

Keep in mind that the flood of Noah's, 8 people and animals survived.

But in all those other books that I given above, nothing survived, but everything Perished.

Perished means cease to exist, So it is that everything in the first flood of water,
Perished, cease to exist, gone forever.

You are all mixed up.

A Message Concerning The Philistines
1 That which came as the word of the LORD to Jeremiah the prophet concerning the Philistines, before Pharaoh conquered Gaza. 2 Thus says the LORD: "Behold, waters are going to rise from the north And become an overflowing torrent, And overflow the land and all its fullness, The city and those who live in it; And the men will cry out, And every inhabitant of the land will wail. 3 "Because of the noise of the galloping hoofs of his stallions, The tumult of his chariots, and the rumbling of his wheels, The fathers have not turned back for their children, Because of the limpness of their hands,

 

[Faithofchristian]

Go ahead and post the chapters and verses.

Take the book of Jeremiah 4:23-26, that here you will find that no man was found nor animals,
So you know that this can not be the flood of Noah's, because in the flood of Noah's there were 8 people and animals that survived the flood of Noah's.

But here in Jeremiah, we find that no man or animals survived

In 2 Peter 3:6-7 here we find that the world that then was being overflowed with water Perished.
We know this can not be the flood of Noah's, because in the flood of Noah's,
8 people and animals survived.

But here in 2 Peter 3:6-7 we find everything Perished, meaning cease to exist, gone forever never to exist again.

So we know this is not the flood of Noah's
Seeing 8 people and animals survived.

 

[Faithofchristian]

You are all mixed up.

A Message Concerning The Philistines
1 That which came as the word of the LORD to Jeremiah the prophet concerning the Philistines, before Pharaoh conquered Gaza. 2 Thus says the LORD: "Behold, waters are going to rise from the north And become an overflowing torrent, And overflow the land and all its fullness, The city and those who live in it; And the men will cry out, And every inhabitant of the land will wail. 3 "Because of the noise of the galloping hoofs of his stallions, The tumult of his chariots, and the rumbling of his wheels, The fathers have not turned back for their children, Because of the limpness of their hands,

If you had read Jeremiah 4:23-26.
You would haved found.
Notice verse 23 as saying the same thing as Genesis 1:2,
The better translation for the word ( was)
In Hebrew is ( became) the earth became without form and void) So what happened to the earth, that it became without form and void ?
In Revelation and Ezekiel tells what happened to the earth, that the earth became without form and void.

23--" I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light"

24 I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.

25 I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.

26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by his fierce anger.

 

[JJ50]

Just because something is quoted in the Bible doesn't make it true.

 

[Audie]

How's about the book of Jeremiah, here everything was destroyed, unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people and animals saved alive,
But in the first flood nothing survived.
Everything Perished.

All recorded in Jeremiah, Ezekiel,Isaiah,
2 Peter. Revelation.Genesis

This is what happens, people not realizing that there was more than the flood of Noah's. That's supported in the Bible.

The flood of water that 2 Peter 3:6-7 is speaking about is not the flood of Noah's.

Here in 2 Peter 3:6-7, you'll find everything Perished, that nothing survived,
Unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people and animals that survived the flood of Noah's.

So you know 2 Peter is not speaking about the flood of Noah's.
In the book of Jeremiah you'll find that no man was found in this flood of water, Unlike the flood of Noah's there were 8 people that were saved alived.
So you know Jeremiah is not speaking about the flood of Noah's.
But the first flood of water that covered the whole earth which happen about a million years ago, which destroyed the dinosaurs and all plant life upon the earth.

When it comes to people, they have no clue or idea about the first flood that's written in the Bible.
I have no doubt that you probably read about it, but didn't realize what you were reading about, but mistakingly it for the flood of Noah's.

Keep in mind that the flood of Noah's, 8 people and animals survived.

But in all those other books that I given above, nothing survived, but everything Perished.

Perished means cease to exist, So it is that everything in the first flood of water,
Perished, cease to exist, gone forever.

Most anything you want to support is supported by the
bible.

But, if it really really says and means there were two
world wide floods-terrific!

What better proof that it is a book of b.s.!

 

[Audie]

There are issues I have been reading about that challenge the BSf hypothesis. Doubts about sustained water flow, and the geomorphology of the Bospurus are a couple of points that do not fit with the hypothesis.

Any local/regional flood would need to be rapid and catastrophic on a level that would make it seem like the end of the world as it was known at the time.

Think of the gradual rise of sealevel in the mediterranean
as glaciers melted, and the first trickle getting through the
Bosporus during a high high tide.

 

[sooda]

Take the book of Jeremiah 4:23-26, that here you will find that no man was found nor animals,
So you know that this can not be the flood of Noah's, because in the flood of Noah's there were 8 people and animals that survived the flood of Noah's.

But here in Jeremiah, we find that no man or animals survived

In 2 Peter 3:6-7 here we find that the world that then was being overflowed with water Perished.
We know this can not be the flood of Noah's, because in the flood of Noah's,
8 people and animals survived.

But here in 2 Peter 3:6-7 we find everything Perished, meaning cease to exist, gone forever never to exist again.

So we know this is not the flood of Noah's
Seeing 8 people and animals survived.

There were NO Philistines until 1200 BC.. and Peter is talking about the end times not a global flood a million years earlier.