The Great Flood

[Tiberius]

I honestly think any kind of omnipotent being could have written a better book that the Bible. Heck, a 5 year old writes better stories...

[Brick-top]

Here's a question, why did God create man in the first place?

[Tiberius]

He thought it was a fun thing to do at the time. Now he considers it one of his worst possible decisions.

[ManofGOD]

He thought it was a fun thing to do at the time. Now he considers it one of his worst possible decisions.

One should understand the story of Noah to be symbolic of the time of the End- where GOD destroys everything except the righteous people. One key marker of this is the re-establishment of Israel. Does being an atheist include being vicious towards religion? This is the beginning of a belief system.

[Edwardo Piet]

He thought it was a fun thing to do at the time. Now he considers it one of his worst possible decisions.

One should understand the story of Noah to be symbolic of the time of the End- where GOD destroys everything except the righteous people. One key marker of this is the re-establishment of Israel. Does being an atheist include being vicious towards religion? This is the beginning of a belief system.

Well, I can't speak for atheism as a whole. But I can speak for myself for example, that I'm rationally against religion. Not viciously.

[CoxRox]

There are some who advocate a 'local' flood. This would 'solve' many of the above noted problems. I agree though that the account does sound ridiculous and far-fetched if it is meant to apply to the whole planet.

[Jason Jarred]

He thought it was a fun thing to do at the time. Now he considers it one of his worst possible decisions.

One should understand the story of Noah to be symbolic of the time of the End- where GOD destroys everything except the righteous people. One key marker of this is the re-establishment of Israel. Does being an atheist include being vicious towards religion? This is the beginning of a belief system.

Why should one understand the story to be symbolic? Have you read Genesis? There is no reference to taking the story as symbolic that I am aware of. How are we supposed to separate what is symoblic allegory as opposed to literal truth? I hear so much speak from christians about reading the bible in context, well I certainly have read it in context - and nowhere does it imply that even 1% of what is contained within should be taken as symbolic allegory.
I'm open to persuasion, show me what I've missed?

[Daystar]

Let's start with the idea of a global flood a few thousand years ago. Just imagine it. The entire planet under water. As far as land animals are concerned this would have been a mass extinction event. Not only all land based life would perish but all land based plant life as well.

Explain why you think that.

And where does all this water come from? Certainly not the Antarctic or Greenland ice shelf as we know they have been in place for hundreds of thousands of years.

We 'know' that? What does that mean? Consider how much of the Earth is under water now and elevation. 70% under water and what? 75% of fresh water frozen in glaciers and polar ice caps. The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: "The average depth of all the seas has been estimated at 3,790 metres (12,430 feet), a figure considerably larger than that of the average elevation of the land above the sea level, which is 840 metres (2,760 feet). If the average depth is multiplied by its respective surface area, the volume of the World Ocean is 11 times the volume of the land above sea level."

But you asked where the water came from. Genesis 1:7 -  Then God proceeded to make the expanse and to make a division between the waters that should be beneath the expanse and the waters that should be above the expanse. And it came to be so.

2 Peter 3:5 - For, according to their wish, this fact escapes their notice, that there were heavens from of old and an earth standing compactly out of water and in the midst of water by the word of God; and by those [means] the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water.

There was a canopy of water around the planet from creation up until the flood. That is where the water came from.

Also, where is the geological evidence for all of this. It would have left 'footprints' everywhere. And yet there is precisely zero.

I know that this is difficult for men of science to fully comprehend, but geological evidence is subject to interpretation. Glacial activity, for example, has often been mistaken for water action.

Scientific American, May 1960, p. 71 - "They were finding ice ages at every stage of the geologic history, in keeping with the philosophy of uniformity. Careful reexamination of the evidence in recent years, however, has rejected many of these ice ages; formations once identified as glacial moraines have been reinterpreted as beds laid down by mudflows, submarine landslides and turbidity currents: avalanches of turbid water that carry silt, sand and gravel out over the deep-ocean floor."

What about the fossil record? A contemorary of Darwin, Alfred Wallace, and others have speculated that the worldwide extinction of many animals like the great saber-toothed tigers who stalked their prey in Europe, horses larger than any now living who roamed North America, and mammoths who foraged in Siberia may have been a result of a worldwide catastrophy and climate change (Planet Earth - Ice Ages, by Windsor Chorlton, 1983, pp. 54, 55, 57).

Even the worldwide flood traditions could be considered as having come from forefathers of those who scattered afterwords.

What about the pluvial periods, huh? What is up with that?

Then think of the logistics of building a vessel, out of wood, capable of not only withstanding this monumental event but also being able to accommodate a representative of the 1.75 million species of the Earth.

And who built this vessel? A vessel the like of which can only be imagined? Noah and his family?

Noah's ark was 300 cubits (438 feet or 134 m) long, 50 cubits (73 feet or 22m) wide, and 30 cubits (44 feet or 13 m) high. (Genesis 6:15)

It had three decks so about 96,000 square feet (8,900 sq m) of floor space. It had a gross volume of about 1,400,000 cubic feet (40,000 cu m) which is roughly the same as what the Titanic had.

It has been estimated by some that of the hundreds of thousands of species of animals today they could have all came from a comparatively few kinds as the Bible uses the term kinds. There could have been as few as 43 kinds or mammals, 74 kinds of birds and 10 kinds of reptiles in the ark. That would have been sufficient to produce what we have today. More liberal estimations conclude 72 kinds of quadrupeds and less than 200 bird kinds.

Though there are upwards of 1,300,000 species of animals and over 60% of these are insects and of the 24,000 amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals 10,000 are birds, 9,000 are reptiles and amphibians and could have survived outside of the ark. Only 5,000 are mammals, including whales and porpoises which would also be outside of the ark. Only about 290 species of land mammals larger than sheep and about 1,360 smaller than rats.

So with inbreeding within the boundaries of the Creator, and kinds, and the expanded figures of the possible result of that as seen today, the ark could have easily have accommodated all.

How did Noah manage to get hold of Kangaroos, Bison, Polar Bears etc. which exist on completely different continents? And what about all the sea creatures? They would have no need for an ark so I presume they were exempt from this wrath were they?

And when the floods reseeded? Where did all the water go and how did Noah get all the species of animal, insect, reptile, bird etc. back to their now decimated home. Even if he could get them all back from where they came from they would have died out in days as there would have been nothing to eat (all vegetation having since died and rotted) unless they eat each other.

Do I really need to go on?

Perhpas you do. How come you don't ask questions like that about evolution? Wouldn't it be the same thing?

---

Here's a question, why did God create man in the first place?

The Bible says God created man simply for him (man) to enjoy himself.

[Daystar]

He thought it was a fun thing to do at the time. Now he considers it one of his worst possible decisions.

One should understand the story of Noah to be symbolic of the time of the End- where GOD destroys everything except the righteous people. One key marker of this is the re-establishment of Israel. Does being an atheist include being vicious towards religion? This is the beginning of a belief system.

Why should one understand the story to be symbolic? Have you read Genesis? There is no reference to taking the story as symbolic that I am aware of. How are we supposed to separate what is symoblic allegory as opposed to literal truth? I hear so much speak from christians about reading the bible in context, well I certainly have read it in context - and nowhere does it imply that even 1% of what is contained within should be taken as symbolic allegory.
I'm open to persuasion, show me what I've missed?

Actually, you are right, Jason. It isn't symbolic allegory. You haven't missed anything there. Good job.

[Meatball]

How did Noah manage to get hold of Kangaroos, Bison, Polar Bears etc. which exist on completely different continents? And what about all the sea creatures? They would have no need for an ark so I presume they were exempt from this wrath were they?

And when the floods reseeded? Where did all the water go and how did Noah get all the species of animal, insect, reptile, bird etc. back to their now decimated home. Even if he could get them all back from where they came from they would have died out in days as there would have been nothing to eat (all vegetation having since died and rotted) unless they eat each other.

Do I really need to go on?

Perhpas you do. How come you don't ask questions like that about evolution? Wouldn't it be the same thing?

What?

Questions like this aren't relevent to the theory of evolution. Evolution doesn't claim that the earth was covered in water for 150 days, after which the water just "went away" for another 150. Evolution doesn't claim that every species of animal on Earth got on a boat because God was mad at man. Evolution doesn't claim that a mechanically impossible wooden boat was build by one man.

Any questions you have regarding evolution, I'd be glad to hear. Believe me, any questions you have all been asked.