Was the Noah flood real ? Did Noah put all living things in his boat?

[whatistrue]

, we would still to explain all the the other marine life elsewhere.

Same way actually. Appalachians were just an example that I am more familiar with given that I have lived in close proximity for a large portion of my life, both before and after traveling the world courtesy of my Uncle Sam. And using plenty of issues as you state is a sign of a Gish Gallop - if you are not familiar with the term, Google is your friend.

As I am getting the “give somebody else a chance” message, I will bow out with one final statement for whatever it may be worth - Never depend on a single source for research, especially if that source has an obvious bias (I mean really; Answers in Genesis tells you right off the bat where they are coming from, and I would give the same warning if it were a site called “Science Rules Bible Drools”).

 

[niceatheist]

Since the Flood would be no longer than 4,000 to 5,000 years ago (by Ussher’s timeline), pretty much all the species now on the planet would have been on the planet then. To argue otherwise is to argue for speed of evolution not born out by anything modern biology can envision. And as to how we know, we have the fossil record, molecular clocks, general knowledge of how long speciation events take in multicellular species, the genomes of many extant species are their relatedness to other species.

But if you imagine God making the world a big flat plain so it can be flooded, and then raising the mountains up to the height of Everest and the subsurface trenches to the depths as we see with Marianis, then none of this is a concern at all. You don’t need to worry about physical constraints at all. I’m not sure what kind of God you envision, and I can’t say as to how that would with Augustinian views, but you’ve pretty much dispensed with science entirely so I don’t imagine this would trouble you in the least.

 

[whatistrue]

All the water would have run off the edges.

It can’t be flat - if it were, the cats would have pushed everything off by now.

 

[Bradskii]

Hobgoblin:

According to articles on this website, the Church allows for interpretations that don’t involve global flooding. There’s no scientific support for a worldwide flood, but there is evidence of massive regional flooding in the Near East a few thousand years ago.

Local Flood.

If it was local, then why load every animal? And what killed everyone living elsewhere?

 

[buffalo]

You don’t need to worry about physical constraints at all. I’m not sure what kind of God you envision, and I can’t say as to how that would with Augustinian views, but you’ve pretty much dispensed with science entirely so I don’t imagine this would trouble you in the least.

Any science which would disagree with your worldview is bogus?
You have no empirical evidence a global flood did not happen.

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

You don’t need to worry about physical constraints at all. I’m not sure what kind of God you envision, and I can’t say as to how that would with Augustinian views, but you’ve pretty much dispensed with science entirely so I don’t imagine this would trouble you in the least.

Any science which would disagree with your worldview is bogus?
You have no empirical evidence a global flood did not happen.

Geologists have known no such flood happened since the 18th century. It didnt’ happen, at least from a scientific point of view. But you’re own statement about the mountains not existing suggests you have no interest in jiving your view with science. So why bother even saying what you said above?

 

[whatistrue]

You have no empirical evidence

Oh, great, a burden of proof fight…

 

[on_the_hill]

If we’re taking the Noah story as literal fact, then it stands to reason that we’d take the earlier passages literally, wherein God created all the living creatures during the first six days. Given that we know there are millions of species, it follows that the millions existed at the time of the Flood.

 

[buffalo]

Geologists have known no such flood happened since the 18th century. It didnt’ happen, at least from a scientific point of view. But you’re own statement about the mountains not existing suggests you have no interest in jiving your view with science. So why bother even saying what you said above?

The question was - was there enough water. The answer is yes.

 

[buffalo]

If we’re taking the Noah story as literal fact, then it stands to reason that we’d take the earlier passages literally, wherein God created all the living creatures during the first six days. Given that we know there are millions of species, it follows that the millions existed at the time of the Flood.

Speciation is lineage splitting. No need to load every one on the ark.

 

[on_the_hill]

Hobgoblin:

There’s evidence of regional floods around the world. There’s not evidence of a global flood though. In fact, the amount of water required to submerge the tallest mountains is about 3 times the amount of water currently in the worlds oceans.

No. This has been resolved. If the earth is leveled out we would be under several thousand feet of water.

That’s kind of cool and yet scary to think about.

 

[buffalo]

If it was local, then why load every animal? And what killed everyone living elsewhere?

That was my point. In addition, Noah could just have walked to avoid it. Seems silly to spend all that time and effort to build an ark.

 

[buffalo]

That’s kind of cool and yet scary to think about.

We can argue about other evidence, but enough water is not one of them. It shouldn’t be used.

 

[whatistrue]

If the earth is leveled out

But it wasn’t, was it? You need to find enough water to cover the land as it was, not under conditions that did not apply at the time.

 

[buffalo]

But it wasn’t, was it? You need to find enough water to cover the land as it was, not under conditions that did not apply at the time.

We now know there is a greater amount of water under the earth than we thought.

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

If it was local, then why load every animal? And what killed everyone living elsewhere?

That was my point. In addition, Noah could just have walked to avoid it. Seems silly to spend all that time and effort to build an ark.

I wouldn’t call it silly. It was God’s idea. Are you asking why God made him go to all that trouble? And what killed everyone else outside the local flood?

I save asking why an omnipotent God needed a flood to punish everyone for later.

 

[whatistrue]

under the earth

Whether this statement is true or not, it is under, not on top of. And what process would bring it up and either leave the space it occupies empty or alternatively what would replace it?

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

Geologists have known no such flood happened since the 18th century. It didnt’ happen, at least from a scientific point of view. But you’re own statement about the mountains not existing suggests you have no interest in jiving your view with science. So why bother even saying what you said above?

The question was - was there enough water. The answer is yes.

There’s enough water, providing you get rid of mountains and any deep sea counterparts, a situation for which there is no physical evidence. Providing you throw geology out the window, yes you might have enough water.

 

[Cimachol]

Please give me a Church document where it clearly says that you may deny the clear and obvious literal meaning of Scripture, against the opinion of all the Church Fathers and all the Theologians?

Pleas eee the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 115-119, which distinguishes between the literal and spiritual senses of sacred scripture. One example of interpreting scripture in the spiritual sense is an allegorical reading, as the catechism notes.

To be sure, sometimes it is difficult to tell whether a given story in Scripture is intended as literal or otherwise, or some combination thereof. It seems to me that when the physical or historical evidence we have from other sources seems to be at odds with the possibility of a literal interpretation, we should be cautious about such an interpretation.

To me, a literal interpretation is in many cases less relevant than a spiritual understanding. Why would I need to know if the whole earth was flooded long, long ago and everyone was killed but one family? Is it just an interesting bit of trivia, or is there something I should understand about God, man or creation based on this reading, which should impact how I live my life? Whatever scripture tells me in the spiritual sense seems of much greater relevance to me.

 

[buffalo]

I save asking why an omnipotent God needed a flood to punish everyone for later.

Of course God could have just made them all disappear. Water is pretty good at taking care of the problem.

Perhaps you misunderstand. The photo illustrates the incongruity with the Biblical and other cultures recording of the event.