Noah's flood

[SavedOnebyGrace]

1 minute ago, Mateo said:

I think it's a good thought exercise.

There is so much to discuss regarding Noah's Flood.

• Is in local or is it global?
• Who are the Nephilim who survived the Flood?
• Why didn't the Flood destroy vegetation like the olive leaf the dove brought back to Noah?
• Did the Flood rise to a level above the Himalayas?
• Where did all the water go because the math doesn't work out?

[LeavesSeeds]

Read what God said.

He's in charge of everything.

HIS math always works out HIS WAY.  Always.

(men messed up)

[Jayne]

1 hour ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

• Why didn't the Flood destroy vegetation like the olive leaf the dove brought back to Noah?
• Did the Flood rise to a level above the Himalayas?
• Where did all the water go because the math doesn't work out?

[1]  Noah and his family and the animals were on the Ark for one year.  According to the Bible, the Ark rested on Ararat in the seventh month and the waters began to recede.  There are all kinds of plants whose seeds are very resilient and can survive excessive droughts, years with no water, or months water-logged.  It wasn't that the olive tree survived the Flood.  The seeds did and in the seventh month when the waters began to recede - vegetation began to sprout again.  By the beginning of the 12th month, enough vegetation was growing back that the dove was able to put a small olive twig in its mouth.

 

[2]  The Bible says that Flood rose above the mountains.  The Himalayas are the youngest of the earth's mountain ranges.  If those mountains were at their full height during Noah's day, then they were covered.  In fact, there are fossilized remains of marine cephalopods in the Himalayas.

 

[3]  As a former math teacher, I'd like to see the "math" that raises a doubt about God's word and the Flood account.  But to answer the question, Psalm 104 - which is David's praise to God as Creator -  explains in a dual poetic passage the two times that the world was covered with water - Day 3 of creation before dry land appeared and the waters receding after the Flood.  Where did the waters go?  To the place that God established for them.  Ocean basins, underground waters, and the water cycle.

 

Psalm 104:5 - 9

"He established the earth on its foundations;
it will never be shaken.
⁶ You covered it with the deep
as if it were a garment;
the waters stood above the mountains.
⁷ At Your rebuke the waters fled;
at the sound of Your thunder they hurried away—
⁸ mountains rose and valleys sank—
to the place You established for them.
⁹ You set a boundary they cannot cross;
they will never cover the earth again."

 

[The_Patriot21]

Seems to me there would be no need for the ark if it was a local flood...he would have just had to up and move had it been local...so common sense says there is absolutely no reason to doubt the biblical account of a global flood.

[enoob57]

On ‎5‎/‎26‎/‎2016 at 5:28 AM, Mateo said:

Was Noah's flood global or local?

it was 15 to 17 feet above the highest point on the earth ... so global definitely global  

[other one]

we might give some thought that the earth may well have not been so mountainous prior to the flood, and the turmoil of the flood may have caused serious land movements that built up the present cotenants that we have now.  The water doesn't have to have been 23,000 feet deep at what is now sea level....   It was totally covered by water from the very start till the land was made to appear.

[The_Patriot21]

5 hours ago, other one said:

we might give some thought that the earth may well have not been so mountainous prior to the flood, and the turmoil of the flood may have caused serious land movements that built up the present cotenants that we have now.  The water doesn't have to have been 23,000 feet deep at what is now sea level....   It was totally covered by water from the very start till the land was made to appear.

That is a very plausible theory, in fact many scientists think pre flood there was just one big continent...and that it was relatively flat. They also theorize that there was a layer of water above the atmosphere, which protected us from UV rays and provided a richer oxygen content in the atmosphere, and the flood was this layer of water coming down. Then the continents broke, and moved apart, and when they stopped folded upward, creating the landmasses we see today. This theory would explain why man lived longer before the flood, and even presents a possible reason for the dinosaurs going extinct in that the larger ones may not have been able to survive the lower oxygen content of the post flood environment, and those that did were later hunted to extinction.

[SavedOnebyGrace]

5 hours ago, other one said:

we might give some thought that the earth may well have not been so mountainous prior to the flood, and the turmoil of the flood may have caused serious land movements that built up the present cotenants that we have now.  The water doesn't have to have been 23,000 feet deep at what is now sea level....   It was totally covered by water from the very start till the land was made to appear.

A study of geology does not show the upheaval you suggest in the time frame speculated.  The fossils found on our highest mountains could well be the proof of a prior global flood that Hazard and I believe was the flood alluded to as Lucifer's Flood in Hazard's posts elsewhere.  The amount of water needed to cover every mountain on earth is not equal to the amount of water on the Earth now.  Do the math.  God either had to supernaturally remove the water (which is not recorded in Holy Scripture) or our concept of Noah's Flood needs to be rethought.  To believe in a global flood one has to believe in a series of extra-biblical events which are recorded nowhere.

Source of the following regarding Noah's Flood: Noah's Flood

Genesis 6-9 tells the fascinating story of Noah, the Ark, and the Flood. Some Christians interpret the text to mean that the biblical flood must have covered the entire globe. They also work to explain the evidence in rocks and fossils in terms of this world-wide flood. Other Christians do not feel the text requires that the flood be global, but could have covered the small region of earth known to Noah. The scientific and historical evidence does not support a global flood, but is consistent with a catastrophic regional flood. Beyond its place in history, the Genesis flood teaches us about human depravity, faith, obedience, divine judgment, grace and mercy.

Scientific Problems with a Universal Flood

There are a number of practical problems that conflict with the idea of a global flood.

First, a universal flood would have changed the topography of the land. For example, in the event of a worldwide flood, the Hidekkel, or Tigris, and Euphrates rivers of Genesis 2:14 would have disappeared under layers of flood-laid sedimentary rock.12 Instead, the Euphrates is mentioned again in Genesis 15:18, and the Hidekkel is alluded to in Daniel 10:4. This suggests that the rivers’ integrity was maintained.

Second, it would require an inordinate amount of water to flood the entire Earth. One popular explanation for this problem is that prior to the flood, the world was watered by mist from a global canopy of water vapor which then condensed, causing the first rains to flood the Earth (Gen. 2:5-6). However, this explanation is incongruent with archaeological evidence that concludes ancient Mesopotamia — the land of the Tigris and Euphrates — was “an extremely arid environment that necessitated the use of irrigation for successful agriculture.” Furthermore, the pressure necessary for the condensation of such a large quantity of water would have been fatal for all living creatures. In fact, a closer look at the Septuagint version of the Old Testament shows that the word for fountain was used in place of the word for mist. Some modern translations have used similar words like stream and spring. In either case, the water is said to have risen from the Earth, which makes it more likely that these terms were referring to irrigation canals. A similar terminology is used in reference to the flood (Genesis 7:11), where “fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.” But when we look closely at the original Hebrew text and consider the use of the words fountains and deep in other passages, it is more likely that the fountains of the deep were also irrigation canals.

Another supposition is that all animals and humans are derived from the survivors on Noah’s Ark. There are several problems with this idea. First of all, there is no way that the 2 million known species of animals could have fit onto the ark — not to mention the estimated 10 to 100 million species yet to be discovered. The dimensions of the Ark were 300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits (Gen. 6:15). At 18 inches per cubit, the Ark would have been 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet tall. This was indeed a large ship by the standards of the time, but not nearly large enough to carry such a vast and varied cargo. Getting all of the animals to fit on the ark, along with the necessary food would not have been feasible. Some have argued that not all species were included, but only representatives of each type. Not only would this still represent an improbably great number of creatures, it would also require that the evolution of related species be drastically accelerated after the flood, in order to account for current diversity of species.

Finally, the migration of animals across mountains and oceans is quite difficult to explain. To make matters worse, there are no traces of animal ancestors along the proposed courses of migration. These are just a few of the many scientific problems with interpreting Genesis 6-9 as a truly universal flood. Efforts to find physical evidence of a global flood have failed. Even some of the most capable Christian researchers, including John Woodward, George Frederick Wright, William Buckland and Joseph Prestwich, all failed in their searches. Young states, “It is clear now that the evidence they were searching for simply does not exist.”

Scientific Problems with a Universal Flood

There are a number of practical problems that conflict with the idea of a global flood.

 

First, a universal flood would have changed the topography of the land. For example, in the event of a worldwide flood, the Hidekkel, or Tigris, and Euphrates rivers of Genesis 2:14 would have disappeared under layers of flood-laid sedimentary rock.¹² Instead, the Euphrates is mentioned again in Genesis 15:18, and the Hidekkel is alluded to in Daniel 10:4. This suggests that the rivers’ integrity was maintained.¹³

 

Second, it would require an inordinate amount of water to flood the entire Earth. One popular explanation for this problem is that prior to the flood, the world was watered by mist from a global canopy of water vapor which then condensed, causing the first rains to flood the Earth (Gen. 2:5-6). However, this explanation is incongruent with archaeological evidence that concludes ancient Mesopotamia — the land of the Tigris and Euphrates — was “an extremely arid environment that necessitated the use of irrigation for successful agriculture.”¹⁴ Furthermore, the pressure necessary for the condensation of such a large quantity of water would have been fatal for all living creatures. In fact, a closer look at the Septuagint version of the Old Testament shows that the word for fountain was used in place of the word for mist. Some modern translations have used similar words like stream and spring.¹⁵ In either case, the water is said to have risen from the Earth, which makes it more likely that these terms were referring to irrigation canals.¹⁶ A similar terminology is used in reference to the flood (Genesis 7:11), where “fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.” But when we look closely at the original Hebrew text and consider the use of the words fountains and deep in other passages, it is more likely that the fountains of the deep were also irrigation canals.¹⁷

 

Another supposition is that all animals and humans are derived from the survivors on Noah’s Ark. There are several problems with this idea. First of all, there is no way that the 2 million known species of animals could have fit onto the ark — not to mention the estimated 10 to 100 million species yet to be discovered. The dimensions of the Ark were 300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits (Gen. 6:15). At 18 inches per cubit, the Ark would have been 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet tall. This was indeed a large ship by the standards of the time, but not nearly large enough to carry such a vast and varied cargo. Getting all of the animals to fit on the ark, along with the necessary food would not have been feasible. Some have argued that not all species were included, but only representatives of each type. Not only would this still represent an improbably great number of creatures, it would also require that the evolution of related species be drastically accelerated after the flood, in order to account for current diversity of species.

 

Finally, the migration of animals across mountains and oceans is quite difficult to explain. To make matters worse, there are no traces of animal ancestors along the proposed courses of migration. These are just a few of the many scientific problems with interpreting Genesis 6-9 as a truly universal flood. Efforts to find physical evidence of a global flood have failed. Even some of the most capable Christian researchers, including John Woodward, George Frederick Wright, William Buckland and Joseph Prestwich, all failed in their searches. Young states, “It is clear now that the evidence they were searching for simply does not exist.”¹⁸

- See more at: http://biologos.org/common-questions/biblical-interpretation/genesis-flood#sthash.syAlnreB.dpuf

[The_Patriot21]

Actually the amount of water is not inequal, if it was one flat continent. Which is far more believable then "Lucifer's" flood. There is only 1 global flood listed in the Bible-and it was Noah's. All other global  flood stories are works of fiction.

[SavedOnebyGrace]

11 hours ago, The_Patriot2016 said:

Seems to me there would be no need for the ark if it was a local flood...he would have just had to up and move had it been local...so common sense says there is absolutely no reason to doubt the biblical account of a global flood.

The "local flood" theory covers the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea.  It's not like the current flooding in Texas.