Noah's Ark - Literal or what?

I'm saying God said that the water came from the sky and the ground and was not just created out of nowhere. Since we're told this, we can think about where that much water might be and how we might get that big a flood. Mud mentioned earlier:

We can estimate the result of an event like this from our knowledge of modern earthquakes. From what we know about earthquakes, it looks like tectonic activity like that would be fatal to all life.

As I said, no one has proposed a global flood model that explains the geographic evidence.

 

Since this is an act of the "Creator" how can you confirm that He did not create it then and there?

Of course I would like to "believe" that He used water that was already above and that was already in the "Fountains of the deep" from beneath Earth's surface. But that is my "preference" not a science project.

We can estimate the result of an event like this from our knowledge of modern earthquakes.
</font>[/QUOTE]Using our imagination at the "global planetary level" and knowing what God "would do" to move the plates??

AGain - that would be "imagination" not "a science project".

Since we have never seen or measured it -- no observation and no global quakes of that magnitude to measure -- do we just "imagine it"??

Gen 8 speaks about the mechanism used to flood the earth and also to restrain the flood.

Psalms 104 gives us more insight into geologic events taking place when the waters stand above the highest mountains.

Remember - we have nothing telling us that this was "An Earthquake" or "many quakes" associated with many volcanic eruptions and a huge depression of the mountains - and raising of the valleys so that AT THE END the Moutains rise back up and the Valleys sink back down.

11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.

When did we measure that last?

God's account of the event (I guess he DID see it -eh?)

Those are a lot of "Details" to "ignore" on behalf of our "imagination" of something we have not seen or measured or reproduced at a planetary level.

What "evidence" is there that shows us that the earth was not covered by water?

In Christ,

Bob

 

#1. I have said nothing about "The 8 elemental views of the world" and neither did they.

#2. The educated Chinese are trained as Atheists in the universities and so Dr. Ziang was indeed of atheist persuasion.

#3. The 8 mouths and boat symbol for large ship can not be "re-invented" here as something "else".

Bob

 

if it was a local flood why build an ark, why not just move. there is NO purpose for an ark without the entire world being flooded. which is what the Bible says those who do not think the ark was real or the flood was local, are just fooling themselves. like i said there has been no point in history in which the location of the ark was not known. the greeks knew, romans knew, egyptians knew, marco polo knew (wasn't he itialian, so they knew). and to this day if you go to turkey and talk to the people who live at the base of the mountain (greater ararat) they plainly tell you that it is there. and every major culture has flood tales, with a google search i found 12 just now. and most (if not all, i have not read every flood story) agree that all life on earth was destroyed.


No world wide flood no real judgement. according to my history book (Civilization past and present, college textbook from MSU), man i have to leave will finish my thoughts on this later.

thankyou and God Bless

 

Since we have never seen or measured it -- no observation and no global quakes of that magnitude to measure -- do we just "imagine it"??</font>[/QUOTE]It's called "extrapolation."

 

Hmm "I imagine so".

But as you already admitted - nobody has spun a story that is quite to your liking yet on explaining HOW God did the flood.

In the end - that is still "imagination". An "Imaginative" appeal to some data and some science principles already known to mankind. But then nobody ever said MANKIND had "figured out" how to design and execute a "World Wide Flood" did they?

When mankind does finally "imagine it" will it be a 12 step process or a 127 step process to generate a world wide flood? Or will it be 127000 steps?

What do you imagine?

In Christ,

Bob

 

The point being - trying to "imagine" solutions for the World Wide Flood and how they would predict certain results -- is a fun game. But it is not "Science" -- rather it is a game that appeals to science to help it along.

In the end it is still a game based on imagination and reaching out to science at convenient spots in the "Stories" that are spun.

This is the same with Evolutionism's usages of science. Having an idea that has incidental or annecdotal supporting arguments in the data or in science is mixing imagination with actual science UNTIL you can actuall reproduce/measure the process/mechanism/event in a lab. It is "Theoretical" and not really "imperical" while it remains in the domain of "imagination"

So the question is - given the "domain" is the realm of "imagination" how much confidence do you really have in your imagination so that you can then tell God that His World Wide Flood account "is wrong" or "was just a local flood??"

In Christ,

Bob

 

Beats me. I don't try!

 

Petrel Previously Posted:

This hypothesis should be ruled out a priori by sincere believers due to the fact that it completely ignores the biblical texts stating implicitly and explicitly that the flood covered the whole world (Genesis Chapter 6:7; 11-13, 17; Chapter 7:4, 17-24; Chapter 8:21; Chapter 9:11, 13-16, 19; Isaiah 54:9; Matthew 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27; Hebrews 11:7; 1 Peter 3:20; 2 Peter 2:5, 3:5-6).

How is it that Christians have begun to doubt that God meant what he said about the flood? It has come about by trusting in the wisdom of man more than in the wisdom of God as revealed to us in his word. Anyone who has lived more than 15 or 20 years knows that the phrase “wisdom of man” is oxymoronic. We are constantly making sincere declarations of truth only to discard them as new or better information comes to light (which may again be flawed).

God’s declarations of truth are not like that “for the truth of the Lord endureth forever” (Ps 117:2) and “the word of the Lord endureth forever” (1Pe 1:25). Furthermore, God’s word is “true from the beginning”—not from Genesis 12 on.

Brothers and sisters, our faith “should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God” (1Cor 2:4-5). Let us not prefer our own understanding nor be “willingly ignorant” that the pre-flood world perished having been “overflowed with water” (2Pe 3:6).

 

Besides the aforementioned biblical difficulties with this hypothesis, there are several logical or common sense problems with it. For one thing, it begs the question: If the flood was indeed global then it would have completely resurfaced the world through the erosion, transportation and deposition of abundant quantities of earth, therefore we do not know what the preflood topography was like anywhere in the world including the “Mediterranean basin.”

Also, there is no good reason to suppose that the Mediterranean basin was arid some 5000 years ago. In fact it should rather be assumed that the region would have been well watered and productive since it was so heavily peopled and we know from studies of palaeontology and archaeology that the ancient world was more tropical and lush than our present world. This is as it should be given that the Lord created the earth to be inhabited and had pronounced it very good.

If??? If indeed. The Bible doesn’t say where Noah lived at the time of the flood. He may have lived in the region around modern day Israel or he may have lived in the region now called Nigeria, or Germany, or Antarctica.

By the way, in the Mediterranean basin location there are mountains several thousands of feet high, like the mountains of Ararat where the Ark came to rest, uh, how do you get a year long flood which covers grown up mountains but stays within a coastal locality like the Mediterranean basin?

Why is that? God stated that one of his purposes in taking animals on the Ark was to “keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.” We don’t really believe that creeping things, beasts of the earth, and birds of the air had not spread beyond the Mediterranean basin, do we? So, since it is safe to assume that these creatures did live in the lands beyond the middle east, it wouldn’t really matter if all the animals in the locality died off because most of the world would still be inhabited by the same kinds of animals.

Petrel also said:

The implication of this statement is that if the flood were global then Noah would be required to cram “every single animal species in the world” into the ark. Not so! The text indicates that God wanted representatives of the various kinds of animals which he had made in the beginning (e.g.: bear kind, dog kind, rodent kind, sauropod kind, cat kind, elephant kind, bovine kind, etc.). A kind is a broader grouping of organisms than a species. A kind is likely equivalent to the genus or family level of modern biological classification. This by itself would greatly reduce the number of organisms on the ark. But when you also consider that God specified that the kinds of organisms he wanted on the ark were land animals which breathed through nostrils the number of creatures becomes even fewer. The myriad varieties of sea creatures and insects, for example, were not required on the ark. Creation researchers, after much study, have proposed that approximately 16,000 specially selected individual animals would have been needed on the ark. Please see: http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/answersbook/arksize13.asp for more information.