The Flood

[Godhead]

Once again, you’ve displayed your lack of knowledge. You state that the Bible is truth mixed with allegory. What you probably mean to say is that the Bible is a mix of true events and allegories. Allegories can, and usually do, contain truth in them. There’d be no point to an allegory if it did not deliver some kind of message or moral.

Isn’t that what I said, the bible is truth mixed with allegory? I have no doubt that the bible is based on true events. The problem is sorting out the facts from fantasy. How am I to actually believe that Noah was a real person when it can easily be proven that the flood, at least on a ‘galactic’ scale never actually occured. How is it possible that a man went out and collected two of every species. I do not lack knowledge. I know that this is impossible using reasoning skills.

We are led to believe from the onslaught of life that such stories are factual to the utmost degree that it, the bible, should be taken in a literal sense as truthful happenings. They are overexaggerated accounts of events. Fables or legends that compromise lives everyday–that one would assume that such things could be possible.

Allegories have truth within them, to show what little knowledge you bring to the table. They are not entirely comprised of truth–that a snake in the garden actually gave Adam and Eve from the tree of knowledge. Men believe this is a true account events according to theologic thought–that an actual serpent handed them the fruit. It is an allegorical thought. The serpent is in fact a symbolic fictitious figure that has always represented the embodiment of wisdom. Men however have no wisdom, in not being able to tell the difference from allegorical imagery from historical fact. There never really was any serpent, that is just an image that reflects the true nature of wisdom–the serpent is the symbol of wisdom.

 

[Godhead]

Good move. But who are you arguing against specifically? Only those who hold this ultra conservative literalist view, or a particular church/denomination? Because the theology of the Catholic Church can accommodate your beliefs perfectly

Not actually, the church dogma teaches that in a literal sense, the bible is an actual account of events. I’m basicly, directing my argument to those who are not entirely versed with philosophical techniques.

 

[Godhead]

Good move. But who are you arguing against specifically? Only those who hold this ultra conservative literalist view, or a particular church/denomination? Because the theology of the Catholic Church can accommodate your beliefs perfectly

Not actually, the church dogma teaches that in a literal sense, the bible is an actual account of events. I’m basicly, directing my argument to those who are not entirely versed with philosophical techniques.

 

[Godhead]

My apologies to you Godhead, I responded to another thread of yours thinking you an Atheist, wonder why!

Note To Self: Never stand to close to someone who calls God a liar…Lightning strikes hard and fast from heaven.!!

OK, back to topic.

I believe your main issue is with interpretation of the scriptures. That my friend is where self interpretation can get you(any of us) into trouble. A 100 different people can read the same passage and get 100 different meanings, all of which may be wrong or at best, half truths.

God created the heavens and earth in 6 days and rested on the Th. Who is to say how LONG a day is for God? Point is, we don’t. That is why God left us a Church to help us on our journey home to heaven.

Try reading scripture with the leadership and help of Holy Mother Church, it might just start making more sense to you.

Absolutely, people can have a million different interpretations; however, without interpreting things for your self–one could never have critical thinking skills that relate the truth to experience and knowledge. Scriptures by themselves offer very little to relate to when they are managed by an organized religion. Every church has an agenda and I’m not buying that agenda–that I should accept the church’s literal interpretation of scripture. Obviously, I can make an observation about church interpretation–they will interpret it in any way that plays in their favor of their belief system.

In truth, you do not have to believe in scripture to inherit eternal life. Ha. The book was made for man. Not man for the stinking book.

 

[PaulDupre]

Not actually, the church dogma teaches that in a literal sense, the bible is an actual account of events. I’m basicly, directing my argument to those who are not entirely versed with philosophical techniques.

This is absolutely untrue. Read the Cathechism of The Catholic Church. It explains the way Catholics interpret scripture, and we are not obliged to take the OT stories literally. The dogma is that God created the universe out of nothing, not that He did it in six earth days.

Oh, and be careful with the blasphemy. You might get banned from this forum, and we wouldn’t want that to happen.

God bless you,
Paul

 

[love4mary]

Godhead,

You sound like you are troubled and angry about this issue

I will pray that you find the inner peace that we all seek.

 

[Montalban]

Listen, Noah did not really collect two of every species. It’s impossible. I just use broad generalizations to cover every possible avenue that a simple mind would follow. I know that there is no assumption that the flood was world wide. I do however, have experience in writing philosophical argument that I know beforehand to cover every possible virtual reality that a debate would throw at me.
If you want to kill something then you kill it with the freaking sword of logical argument. I know I can’t kill it. I know that the bible has berated truth in the simple mind.

You’re showing you’re not even concerned about reading the responses

 

[rbarcia]

A world wide flood of devestation? Guys, I’m not buying it. The clarity of truth should be as evident as day. Are you telling me Noah went to Australia and collected all the marsupials? I’m not buying it guys.

Listen, if the polar ice caps melted then that would still not be enough water to cover the entire world.

So God is not capable of producing enough rain. Remember, the earth had a layer of water underneath the ozone layer further protecting us from the sun, thus allowing people to live longer because of the extra protection against the sun.

**

Gen 1

6 Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” 7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so.

**

cont…

 

[rbarcia]

I’m not buying it guys. I’m just not. You could try to sell me a bridge in Brooklyn too but I’m not buying it.

Second Peter 3:3–8 tells us that people who scoff at the Bible are “willingly ignorant” of the Creation and the Flood. In order to understand science and the Bible, we must not be ignorant of those two great events in Earth’s history.

1. Over 500 Flood legends from all parts of the world have been found. Most have similarities to the Genesis account.
2. Noah’s ark was built only to float, not to ail anywhere. Many ark scholars believe that the ark was a “barge” shape, not a pointed “boat” shape. This would greatly increase the cargo capacity. Scoffers have pointed out that the largest sailing ships were less than 300 feet because of the problem of twisting and flexing the boat. These ships had giant masts and sails to catch the wind. Noah’s ark needed neither of those and therefore had far less torsional stress.
3. Even using the small 18-inch cubit ( height is 6’1" and I have a 21- nch cubit), the ark was large enough to hold all the required animals, people, and food with room to spare.
4. The length-to-width ratio of 6 to 1 is what shipbuilders today often use. This is the best ratio for stability in stormy weather.
5. The ark may have had a “moon-pool” in the center. The larger ships would have a hole in the center of the bottom of the boat with walls extending up into the ship. There are several reasons for this feature: a) It allowed water to go up into the hole as the ship crested waves. This would be needed to relieve strain on longer ships. b) The rising and lowering water acted as a piston to ump fresh air in and out of the ship. This would prevent the buildup of dangerous gasses from all the animals on board. c) The hole was a great place to dump waste into the ocean without going outside.
6. The ark may have had large drogue (anchor) stones suspended over the sides to keep it more stable in rough weather. Many of these tones have been ound in the region where the ark landed.
7. Noah lived for 950 years. Many Bible scholars believe the pre-Flood people were much larger than modern man. Skeletons over 11 feet tall have been found. If Noah were taller, his cubit (elbow to fingertip) would have been much larger also. This would make the ark larger by the same ratio.
8. God told Noah to bring two of each kind (seven of some), not of each species or variety. Noah had only two of the dog kind, which would include the wolves, coyotes, foxes, mutts, etc. The “kind” grouping is probably closer to our modern family division in taxonomy, and would greatly reduce the number of animals on the ark. Animals have diversified into many varieties in the last 4,400 years since the Flood. This diversification is not anything similar to great claims that the evolutionists teach.
9. Noah did not have to get the animals. God brought them to him (Genesis 6:20, “shall come to thee”).
10. Only land- welling, air-breathing animals had to be included on the ark (“in which is the breath of life,” Genesis 7:15,22).
11. Many animals sleep, hibernate, or become very inactive during bad weather.
12. All animals (and people) were vegetarian before and during the Flood according to Genesis 1:20–30 with Genesis 9:3.
13. The pre-Flood people were probably much smarter and more advanced than people today. The longer life spans, Adam’s direct contact with God, and the fact that they could glean the wisdom of many generations that were still alive would greatly expand their knowledge base.
14. The Bible says that the highest mountains were covered by 15 cubits [20 feet] of water (Genesis 7:20). This is half the height of the ark. The ark was safe from scraping bottom at all times.

cont…

 

[rbarcia]

1. The large mountains, as we have them (today, did not exist until after the Flood when “the mountains arose and the valleys sank down” (Psalm 104:5–9; Genesis 8:3–8).
2. There is enough water in the oceans right now to cover the earth 8,000 feet deep if the surface of the earth were smooth.
3. Many claim to have seen the ark in recent times in the area in which the Bible says it landed. There are two primary schools of thought about the actual site of the ark. Much energy and time have been expended to prove both views. Some believe the ark is on Mt. Ararat, covered by snow (CBS showed a one-hour special in 1993 about this site). Others believe the ark is seventeen miles south of Mt. Ararat in a valley called “the valley of eight” (eight souls on the ark). The Bible says the ark landed in the “mountains” of Ararat, not necessarily on the mountain itself.
4. The continents were not separated until 100–300 years after the Flood (Genesis 10:25). The people and animals had time to migrate anywhere on earth by then.
5. The top 3,000 feet of Mt. Everest (26,000 –29,000 feet) is made up of sedimentary rock packed with seashells and other oceandwelling animals.
6. Sedimentary rock is found all over the world. Sedimentary rock is formed in water.
7. Petrified clams in the closed position (found all over the world) testify to their rapid burial while they were still alive, even on top of Mount Everest.
8. Bent rock layers, fossil graveyards, and polystrata fossils are best explained by a Flood.
9. People choose to not believe in the Flood because it speaks of the judgment of God on sin (2 Peter 3:3–8). (24:38,39 continued)

 

[rbarcia]

Peter knew the flood was real

**

2 Peter 3:3-8

3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

**

Jesus told us the flood was real

**

Luke 17

26 And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: 27 They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.

Matthew 24:37-39

37 But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.

**

Jesus told us His coming would be ** also ** like the flood. If you do not believe in the flood, then how can you believe in His coming.

 

[levi86]

Not actually, the church dogma teaches that in a literal sense, the bible is an actual account of events. I’m basicly, directing my argument to those who are not entirely versed with philosophical techniques.

If that was the case I wouldn’t be catholic

Here are a couple of official Church documents that address the issue of scriptural interpretation. They state very clearly that many aspects of the OT, including Genesis may be allegorical.

ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V2REVEL.HTM

papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13provi.htm

 

[patg]

Not actually, the church dogma teaches that in a literal sense, the bible is an actual account of events. I’m basicly, directing my argument to those who are not entirely versed with philosophical techniques.

Total nonsense - I wouldn’t be associated with the Church either if this was the case.

 

[colliric]

So God is not capable of producing enough rain. Remember, the earth had a layer of water underneath the ozone layer further protecting us from the sun, thus allowing people to live longer because of the extra protection against the sun.

**

Gen 1

6 Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” 7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament;** and it was so.

cont…

I believe the upper waters was moses way of saying what we now call “Clouds”. Although the WAS alot more water in general in his day.

 

[colliric]

1. Many claim to have seen the ark in recent times in the area in which the Bible says it landed. There are two primary schools of thought about the actual site of the ark. Much energy and time have been expended to prove both views. Some believe the ark is on Mt. Ararat, covered by snow (CBS showed a one-hour special in 1993 about this site). Others believe the ark is seventeen miles south of Mt. Ararat in a valley called “the valley of eight” (eight souls on the ark). The Bible says the ark landed in the “mountains” of Ararat, not necessarily on the mountain itself.

More about the Ararat site:
The CIA took accidental photo’s of a strange formation on the south-west side of the mountain about 3 quaters of the way up during the 50s when theyw ere trying to spy on the russians, they gave this the name “Ararat Anomoly” and for years it was touted that the CIA may very well have accidently landed on the motherload .

Unfortunalty whatever their varified photos show, which
certainly is either a very strange rock formation, or something 3 times the size of titanic, the region is unexplorable and will take years to get men up there to look at it.

In 2003(but released only last year) a sattelitte photo was taken of the area from above, and it showed something remarkable, This large formation or object is not made of the same substance as the surrounding area, it looks literaly like a “nautical shaped” formation. This new photo shows whatever this thing is(if it is anything), it is “jutting out from under the ice”.

I found this image(which is very very real ezspecially consoidering the CIA were the ones to stumble on the site first), quite scary and inspiring regardless of whatever lies under that ice. A giant boat 3 times the size of titanic? or simply a weird rock formation? we shall see.

Even if it is not true at least it may explain the history on explorers who went to mount Ararat and claimed they still saw the majestic ark sitting on top of the mountain sticking out from under the ice. Perhaps they layed eyes of this weird thing, whatever it is:

worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49203

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hi godhead, many christians believe that Noah’s flood was local. So, frankly I see your criticism as mute.

For example, the hebrew word for “earth” simply means “land”, so saying the entire earth is flooded in that context can simply mean the “entire land” is flooded.

Just using simple common sense, 8 people feeding how many animals everyday? cleaning out all their poop overboard. bathing them as needed.

There are only 1440 mintues in day ( 60 x 24) for 8 people that is 11,520 mintues total. If it took them just one mintue each to feed and clean up after each animal, with NO SLEEP at all, they could only service 11,520 animals a day. If it took five mintues per animal a day, that is 2,304 animals – again with no sleep. But, if you factor in 8 hours sleep for each person, then that is only 1,536 animals being cared for everyday which only represents 768 species ( not taking into account for clean vs unclean animals ). Those that believe in a global flood would have to account for every animals species alive today as coming from only 768 animals species on that Ark. But, some YEC also believe that Dino was on the ark too. So, that 768 species would have to accound for extinct species too.

sources,

The Impossible Voyage of Noah’s Ark
by Robert Moore
ncseweb.org/resources/articles/8619_issue_11_volume_4_number_1__3_12_2003.asp

edwardtbabinski.us/flood_evidence.html

CREATION AND THE FLOOD: An Alternative to Flood Geology and Theistic Evolution, by Davis A. Young,

A Review of Davis A. Young, The Biblical Flood: A Case Study of the Church’s Response to Extrabiblical Evidence. Carlisle: The Paternoster Press, 1995
robibrad.demon.co.uk/DavisYoung.htm

The Christian View of Science and Scripture by Bernard Ramm
asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1992/PSCF3-92Spradley.html

American Scientific Affiliation
asa3.org/

wheaton.edu/ACG/
Affiliation of Christian Geologists

asa3.org/ASA/related_groupsASA.html

talkorigins.org/

Noah’s Flood: The New Scientific Discoveries About The Event That Changed History (Paperback)
by William Ryan (Author), Walter Pitman
amazon.com/Noahs-Flood-Scientific-Discoveries-Changed/dp/0684859203

Questions, I wonder how young earth creationists answer are:

How many species were on the ark? show math please.

How do those species account for all the species that are alive today? including those that went extinct too.

How do you account for all the plant species today?

How many basic plant species were on the ark to account for this? seeds and plants would be needed.

How many fish species are there today?

How did fish deal with the mixing of mud with flesh and salt waters?

How do you account for the great lakes around Michigan today in light of the mixing of fresh and salt water?

Note: there are salt mines in Michigan.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Fill a bowl full of water, now take a glass of water out of it and pour it back into that same bowl. Will the water level go down?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

How Good Are Those Young-Earth Arguments?
A Close Look at Dr. Hovind’s List of Young-Earth Arguments and Other Claims
by Dave E. Matson

“In order to condense that vapor canopy into rain, it would have to release enough heat to raise the temperature of our atmosphere to 6000 degrees! That’s a straightforward calculation of the latent heat of vaporization.”
talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-add.html

"How could an atmosphere almost 100% water vapor not condense? The temperature would have to be raised to the point where the partial pressure of water equals 900 atmospheres, i.e. the boiling point at that pressure. So we find Noah et al. living in a 13,000psi boiler. Is this credible? "
talkorigins.org/faqs/canopy.html

google.com/search?hl=en&q=Noah%27s++Flood+pitman

google.com/search?hl=en&q=Noah%27s+flood+pressure+cooker

 

[Valke2]

More about the Ararat site:
The CIA took accidental photo’s of a strange formation on the south-west side of the mountain about 3 quaters of the way up during the 50s when theyw ere trying to spy on the russians, they gave this the name “Ararat Anomoly” and for years it was touted that the CIA may very well have accidently landed on the motherload .

Unfortunalty whatever their varified photos show, which
certainly is either a very strange rock formation, or something 3 times the size of titanic, the region is unexplorable and will take years to get men up there to look at it.

In 2003(but released only last year) a sattelitte photo was taken of the area from above, and it showed something remarkable, This large formation or object is not made of the same substance as the surrounding area, it looks literaly like a “nautical shaped” formation. This new photo shows whatever this thing is(if it is anything), it is “jutting out from under the ice”.

I found this image(which is very very real ezspecially consoidering the CIA were the ones to stumble on the site first), quite scary and inspiring regardless of whatever lies under that ice. A giant boat 3 times the size of titanic? or simply a weird rock formation? we shall see.

Even if it is not true at least it may explain the history on explorers who went to mount Ararat and claimed they still saw the majestic ark sitting on top of the mountain sticking out from under the ice. Perhaps they layed eyes of this weird thing, whatever it is:

worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49203

how big was the Titanic. The ark in Genesis is about 300 yards long and 50 meters high, If I am remembering correctly.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

A world wide flood of devestation? Guys, I’m not buying it. The clarity of truth should be as evident as day. Are you telling me Noah went to Australia and collected all the marsupials? I’m not buying it guys.

Listen, if the polar ice caps melted then that would still not be enough water to cover the entire world.

I’m not buying it guys. I’m just not. You could try to sell me a bridge in Brooklyn too but I’m not buying it.

Then you are going to say that the flood is symbolic. Symbolic to what, guys? Listen, if the flood never happened, which it didn’t, then the story that follows the flood, never happened. Why? Because the story is a direct cause of the flood. This is what we call a fable guys. And you fell for it.

Then you’re going to say, no, it was a known world flood.

But wasn’t it the people on the arc that re-populated the known world? How could a handful of people re-populate the world? And you know about incest; and what happens–deformities? Listen, I’m just not buying it. How could Noah collect two of all species, when you know very well that new species are being found all the time. Are you telling me that Noah found every species in the known world?

I’m not buying it guys. I’m just not.

Another thead on the Flood - oh goody​