These are just a few sites that will give you the answers on Noah's Flood
Rapid Post-Flood Speciation:
A Critique of the Young-Earth Model
The Flood of Noah
Do a search at RTB for this realplayer talk. It explains these dates better than anything I've heard so far
A discussion about the date of Noah's Flood and early human migration
Subscribe
Posts
Comments
10 comments:
[Reposted from Ray's blog where I'm not sure it'll get posted]
Well, Vera, I've tried replying twice to you, but my last remark can't seem to get through. So, I'll just tell you where I've stored it.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?p=407016#407016
If you want to discuss it further, we can do it over there.
Hey Vera,
I read the Flood article and have a few, quick questions/clarifications, if that's ok?
I guess the main point of what he's saying is that it was a local flood, covering the area around Mesopotamia, which - I think - there is a fair amount of evidence to support as an actual event, even acknowledged by secular historians. Is that essentially it?
This mean that when Noah took the animals on-board the ark, he only had to take animals from that region and even that wasn't for the purpose of re-population, it was for ritual sacrifice and personal livestock after the deluge. Correct?
Does this local flood imply that the sinful element of mankind was found only in Mesopotamia at that time, or were there no peoples elsewhere?
Wouldn't a fair number of people in the region have access to boats and - due to the localized nature of the flood - be able to escape to non-flooded areas?
One last question.
Why do so many Christians believe that a plain reading of Genesis indicates a global Flood when the geological evidence plainly contradicts such an occurrence?
Many thanks for your thoughts.
Matt
Does this local flood imply that the sinful element of mankind was found only in Mesopotamia at that time, or were there no peoples elsewhere?
The latter
Wouldn't a fair number of people in the region have access to boats and - due to the localized nature of the flood - be able to escape to non-flooded areas?
It was a fairly large flood
Why do so many Christians believe that a plain reading of Genesis indicates a global Flood when the geological evidence plainly contradicts such an occurrence?
No offense but they are usually either scientifically ignorant or stubborn
MrFreeThinker,
Thanks for the responses.
You said:
"The latter"
Vera, how does this idea of all humanity being located in Mesopotamia square with your acceptance of the emergence of mankind out of Africa and the tracking of migration around the globe? Surely the last common ancestor should be found in/around Turkey, not East Africa if Noah and his family were the only human survivors?
Also, do you discount the evidence of ancient civilizations in Egypt, S. America and Australasia that are, apparently, older than 4,000 years? Actually, as an additional question; do you know when the Flood occurred?
Back to you, MrFreeThinker;
"It was a fairly large flood"
Irrelevant. Some people must have had access to boats and, if the Flood was not global, would have been able to reach dry land. It did take over a month for the waters to rise to their final level.
"No offense but they are usually either scientifically ignorant or stubborn"
They would probably say that you are Scripturally ignorant or stubborn/living in Sin. I guess, when salvation is at stake, the YEC/OEC debate is fairly unimportant, eh? I mean, I rarely see Christians taking each other to task about this.
I have to say that, from a plain reading, it does look to me like a Global Flood was implied in the story. I'm no Bible scholar though, so I don't expect my opinion to carry any weight.
Thanks very much for your thoughts.
Matt
You say some of the most ill conceived things over at Ray Comfort's site that I've ever seen anyone say in my entire life. You sound like a poorly educated child who got hold of a few scientific words and thinks that they sound grownup by flaunting them around. Aside from that, you are truly vile.
I just had to come see what it is that you attempt to do here. I see that it is just more conjecture with nothing but the flimsy pseudoscience of some Christian website (RTB) that only an ill trained moron would accept as credible scientific work.
You are a joke and if you think of yourself as anything more, you only make yourself look more sadly ignorant.
Now that wasn't very nice Mr. 'no gods', was it?
Go learn some manners and then come back to the table when you have something to contribute to the discussion.
Sorry about that.
Now, about these nagging Flood questions...?
Hi Matt
I am terribly sorry that I didn't see these posts until just now. I think I have fixed the problem.
I guess the main point of what he's saying is that it was a local flood, covering the area around Mesopotamia, which - I think - there is a fair amount of evidence to support as an actual event, even acknowledged by secular historians. Is that essentially it?
Yes. That is it.
This mean that when Noah took the animals on-board the ark, he only had to take animals from that region and even that wasn't for the purpose of re-population, it was for ritual sacrifice and personal livestock after the deluge. Correct?
yes
Does this local flood imply that the sinful element of mankind was found only in Mesopotamia at that time, or were there no peoples elsewhere?
Yes. I haven't asked RTB this question yet but the Bible seems to be fairly precise about the times from Adam to Noah and it is only about 1000 years. That would be about enough time for a small population to grow in the Mesopotamian area.
Wouldn't a fair number of people in the region have access to boats and - due to the localized nature of the flood - be able to escape to non-flooded areas?
Not if it was a deluge where you had monumental flooding.
Why do so many Christians believe that a plain reading of Genesis indicates a global Flood when the geological evidence plainly contradicts such an occurrence?
This is something that I believe is important. When a person is trying to communicate something in writing, they may not communicate it in terms that a future generation would understand. Just for example, the term "give me a hand" means something entirely different than what it implies in another language or to another hearer. God makes it clear in Romans 1 that the record of nature is an understanding of His eternal power and Godhead. Therefore, I think that what science uncovers in the earth and world is valid to unlock the truths of the Bible.
I could say, "The world is falling apart." Do I mean that the entire globe is falling apart or just my personal world? I could say, "In the day of his defeat, he was ruined." What if the defeat happened over a stretch of time and what I mean is a time period? The world of nature and history unlocks those secrets.
Plain reading of the text usually works but not always. I think Dr. Ross makes a good point about the Sabbath rest for land and agriculture that is contained in the Bible and lasts a year. The idea being 6 years of harvest and 1 year of rest. God is not on our biological clock. His 6 and 1 is not our 6 and 1. The land is also not on a human's biological clock so that its 6 and 1 is 6 years and 1 year.
The Bible is full of these little pieces of treasure. That's why I enjoy reading it.
Vera
Matt
They would probably say that you are Scripturally ignorant or stubborn/living in Sin. I guess, when salvation is at stake, the YEC/OEC debate is fairly unimportant, eh? I mean, I rarely see Christians taking each other to task about this.
I did recently on Ray's board. I'm not sure it was a good idea. So many people are building their whole faith and understanding of God around YEC and it is very difficult to get them to see this in a new light.
I had always been taught that God was loving....period. The idea being that the world before man sinned was pristine and lovely. I think the Bible is pretty clear that the struggle against sin came on the scene long before Adam and Eve. I say that because Jesus was slain from the foundation of the world. How does He already know what's going to happen at that point? And if so, why? Why would God do that? I think the reason is that God uses chain reactions all the time. And he knew that if he created men and women, satan would do what was in his heart and in that way, God could become a man to defeat satan once and for all. When we discount things like t-rex and call it as something that is a result of man's sin, we then discount that attribute of God that is terrifying.
I really sorry for neglecting these posts. I really had no idea anyone was posting here. I will try and stay on top of this.
Vera
You say some of the most ill conceived things over at Ray Comfort's site that I've ever seen anyone say in my entire life. You sound like a poorly educated child who got hold of a few scientific words and thinks that they sound grownup by flaunting them around. Aside from that, you are truly vile.
I just had to come see what it is that you attempt to do here. I see that it is just more conjecture with nothing but the flimsy pseudoscience of some Christian website (RTB) that only an ill trained moron would accept as credible scientific work.
You are a joke and if you think of yourself as anything more, you only make yourself look more sadly ignorant.
Name one and let's go over it.
Vera
Hey Vera,
Thanks for the responses and no worries on the lag-time; I don't expect anyone to monitor their every bog-posting 24/7!
You said:
"Yes. I haven't asked RTB this question yet but the Bible seems to be fairly precise about the times from Adam to Noah and it is only about 1000 years. That would be about enough time for a small population to grow in the Mesopotamian area."
As I said before; how does this idea of all humanity being located in Mesopotamia square with your acceptance of the emergence of mankind out of Africa and the tracking of migration around the globe? Surely the last common ancestor should be found in/around Turkey, not East Africa if Noah and his family were the only human survivors?
Also, do you discount the evidence of ancient civilizations in Egypt, S. America and Australasia that are, apparently, older than 4,000 years?
Can you give me a ball-park figure as to when this flood occurred (according to the RTB model)?
That's all for now, but feel free to ask any questions in return - it's been a bit of a one-way street thus far.
Cheers,
Matt
Post a Comment