Questions about Noahs Flood (is it logical or just magic you have to believe)

[one.opinion]

6 minutes ago, Still Alive said:

I offer this for this one reason: We have to be careful about taking literally what we read in the bible. And even moreso what our particular church has taught for generations. Sometimes we infer a lot of stuff that is not there.

Thank you, Still Alive, I appreciate Michael Heiser's approach to a lot of different issues. This was my favorite part of the article:

Quote

The lesson here is that those who prefer a global flood reading of Gen 6-8 need to avoid calling those who don’t “unbiblical” in their position, or arguing “from science against the Bible” when taking a local-regional view. The above has nothing to do with science. It’s a text-based approach. So, if we’re going to argue about the biblical account of the flood, let’s do that from the text, not personal attacks.

If someone carefully reads and still accepts a global flood, that's fine. But do it with a spirit of humility that doesn't judge a fellow Christ-follower as someone that doesn't believe the Bible because they have a different view.

 

[Still Alive]

14 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

Thank you, Still Alive, I appreciate Michael Heiser's approach to a lot of different issues. This was my favorite part of the article:

If someone carefully reads and still accepts a global flood, that's fine. But do it with a spirit of humility that doesn't judge a fellow Christ-follower as someone that doesn't believe the Bible because they have a different view.

 

This is why I like Heiser so much. He cuts straight to the chase and doesn't suffer nonsense. That last sentence addresses one of my pet peeves regarding disagreement on biblical issues between Christians.

[enoob57]

53 minutes ago, Still Alive said:

This may help:

http://drmsh.com/argue-biblical-text-local-regional-flood-instead-global-flood/

I offer this for this one reason: We have to be careful about taking literally what we read in the bible. And even moreso what our particular church has taught for generations. Sometimes we infer a lot of stuff that is not there.

 

And if we do get too literal, we run the risk of believing in logical fallacies easily destroyed by enemies of the gospel. It's what my tag line is all about.

One of the most important aspects of being Christian is knowing the Bible and when the Bible says 15 cubits over the highest mtns. a cubit being 18" to 22" then God says 22.6 ft. to 27.6 ft. over all....
 

Gen 7:19-20

19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
KJV
 

[Blood Bought 1953]

 

Jesus believed the story of Noah and the flood......that gives it lots of credence ,I believe......

[Who me]

21 hours ago, one.opinion said:

 

 I see no good explanation for why God would make a fossil record that would only LOOK like evolution occurred over hundreds of millions of years.

You can read much more about geological evidence - here.

An interesting account that determinly does not give any credibility to creationist reasoning. It's principla faults are it uncritical acceptance of long ages and it refusal to give credence to the bible. In short a biased and untrustworthy account.

 

I assume you mean atheistic scientists here. There are numerous Christians in both geology and paleontology, and very few find what they believe to be solid evidence for a global flood.

It is not a case of how many people believe something, but whether what they believe is true.

'You packed an incredible amount of irony into this statement' Unfortunetly it is a true statement.

for example. Is the bible God's word. Yes or No. If it is, then it teaches a global flood, so why don't you believe it?

[one.opinion]

7 minutes ago, Who me said:

Is the bible God's word. Yes or No.

Yes.

8 minutes ago, Who me said:

If it is, then it teaches a global flood, so why don't you believe it?

I don't think it does. The "whole earth" at the time of authorship was considerably less than what we now know. Also, if the flood was of the extent you assume, I believe there would be clear evidence of it. That evidence is missing.

[Who me]

4 hours ago, one.opinion said:

Yes.

I don't think it does. The "whole earth" at the time of authorship was considerably less than what we now know. Also, if the flood was of the extent you assume, I believe there would be clear evidence of it. That evidence is missing.

God told Lot to flee from a local disaster, he could equaly have told Noah to do the same.

If it was local why save animal and why say that all living things with the breath of life in it died.

If over a mile deep sedimentary rock is not evidence of a flood what would you accept as evidence of a global flood?

 

[one.opinion]

15 minutes ago, Who me said:

God told Lot to flee from a local disaster, he could equaly have told Noah to do the same.

The fire and brimstone dropped on Sodom and Gomorrah was a "precision attack", while a large flood was not.

17 minutes ago, Who me said:

If it was local why save animal

Perhaps preserve members of ecological communities? Perhaps preserve the portion of His creation that was innocent? I don't know.

26 minutes ago, Who me said:

If over a mile deep sedimentary rock is not evidence of a flood what would you accept as evidence of a global flood?

I'm not a geologist. Are there primary research articles that discuss the sedimentary rock and why is is evidence of a global flood?

[Joulre2abba]

On 4/28/2019 at 10:03 AM, Leyla said:

1) How can a planet be habitable after global flood on such a big scale?        

The water subsided before those on the ark even got off. Except for water that remained in low lying areas.

2) How did all sea life survive? 

A lot didn't. The deluge was sudden. It fell so heavily from above the clouds. Up to that time the land was watered from dew. There had never been rains from the clouds. The waters had been stored in what was called the firmament. It acted like a terrarium.

Until the day that the firmament broke open and down came all that water all at once. It hit the earth with such force that it splashed so high as to reach the moon and left water spots on it.

The air was stirred and caused violent turbulent waters that ran swiftly passed rocks and created mountains, it upturned rocks or left them at an angle.. the water carried many sea life into soft dirt areas and buried them swiftly.

The ark, built like an elongated box was made of floating wood and covered with tar bobbed around like a fisher's sinker that during the turbulence always rose to the surface.

The findings at the poles indicated that at one time that area was like Hawaii. The flood deluge caused such a swift atmospheric change at the poles that quick froze the animals there. One was found with plants in it's mouth of the kind that grows in warm temperatures.

3) After the flood was over, what were animals supposed to eat? Carnivores would kill off all the saved animals and plant eating animals would have nothing to eat.   

During the flood all selected animals were on the ark. They were all young enough that none of the carnivores had learned to see any of it's other animals in the ark as food.. they survived on milk from those animals that gave milk. And eggs from egg producing animals.

When they got off the ark. The plants available to eat were edible water plants until the land produced grasses and plants to eat. In the way that God kept the lions from eating Daniel when he'd been put in the lion's den, the meat eating animals did not eat any animals in order that all species survive.

4) Even if we assume that the animals survived and had enough oxygen, food etc...

There wasn't an oxygen problem. The food was plentiful for that amount of young animals at that time. Just like they survived on the ark, they survived on land.

How did they find their way back home, to the different regions in all the other continents?  

You're assuming that there were continents at that time, but the drifting of land masses hadn't begun to happen yet. They began during the time of Peleg.

But to answer how the animals would find their way "back home". I'll ask this: how did all of the selected animals who each lived great distances from each other, and from human inhabited places, find the ark?

Do you live in a place where you can witness the seasonal migration of birds and or animals? It's that kind of instinct that lead them after the flood to the places where all live now. .. unless man has driven them out.

It's my thinking that such migrations that can be witnessed now are a residual or left over of that time when the animals traveled the distances to the ark.

5) If we world was flooded on this big scale, why cant we find any evidence?? Do you think our scientists are really so incompetent, that they cant find even one evidence for it? 

Do you really think that the atheist evolutionist will admit to finding anything that supports the Biblical record? 

But there are some Christians that have done research in the field and have found evidence. Dr. Carl Baugh is one of them. The answers that I've given to your questions come from such as he and others to be found on the internet.

Plus any one can look at the Grand Canyon and other such places that show natural waterlines in the rock which points to the receding of water as from a great flood. The receding time happened at a much shorter scale than the evolutionists say that it happened. They use measurements of it happening over millions of years. The Egyptian Phoenix has waterlines that didn't take millions of years for a flood that surrounded it to recede.

But many of the evolutionist claims in using a scale of millions or thousands of years for something to happen have been proved wrong at the recovery of the area around Mount St. Helens. If it were up to the evolutionists they'd say that recovery like that could only happen over thousands of years.

 

[one.opinion]

12 hours ago, Joulre2abba said:

Until the day that the firmament broke open and down came all that water all at once. It hit the earth with such force that it splashed so high as to reach the moon and left water spots on it.

I started reading your response, but ran into this complete quackery pretty quickly and gave up on the rest. This assertion is completely unsupported by evidence from science or the Bible. Someone made this up - probably as a story for their 4 year-old child.