Noah’s Flood: The Eyeball Test

mars-viking-zoomIt is believed the landscape on Mars was formed by large-scale flooding that took place over much of the planet.  The more popular theories suggest much of the flooding was caused by volcanoes, trapped ice, or a meteor strike or some combination of all those things.

Taking a look at Mars now, there are features that appear as flood plains, and canyons which are often believed to have formed through these cataclysmic floods.  It’s hard to imagine now since the planet looks more like the desert planet Tatooine in the movie Star Wars.  Nevertheless, there has been a great deal of research into where the water came from, and where it went. These questions are difficult to answer, and theories abound, but we keep studying because as you can see, Mars shows plenty of evidence of massive flooding.

Slide58This is earth.  We call ourselves the water planet and we have many of the same features that Mars has, including massive flood plains and canyons, which many scientists also believe were caused by cataclysmic flooding. The Bible talks about a massive flood in fact.  It’s not hard to imagine now, since the planet is still covered by water to a large extent and looks nothing like Tatooine or Mars.  It is believed Noah’s flood involved volcanoestrapped water, a meteor or a combination of all three.  Nevertheless, research into Noah’s Flood is generally discouraged because of questions about where the water came from and where it went.  The questions can be somewhat difficult to answer, and theories do abound but as you can see, Earth (the water planet) shows no evidence of massive flooding… *sarcasm*


Author: CP

Pastor of Mountain View Christian Church, Mountain View MO. 47 years old, 3 kids and a beautiful wife! God has really blessed me.

41 thoughts on “Noah’s Flood: The Eyeball Test”

  1. If I understand what I read correctly, God opened the watery depths of the earth (underground water) and also opened the floodgates of the earth. (Genesis 6: 11-12)
    and Job 37:6-16; 38:22-23, 34) Job is full of all kinds of scientific knowledge which God Himself reveals.

  2. And in Job 38:
    8 “Who shut up the sea behind doors when it burst forth from the womb,9 when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick darkness,10 when I fixed limits for it and set its doors and bars in place,11 when I said, ‘This far you may come and no farther; here is where your proud waves halt’?
    What more poetically describes the creation of gravity?

  3. After rereading I amend my original comment to say yes! 🙂 the book of Job uses all sorts of prose and imagery but it matches up with reality incredibly well!

  4. Thank you!
    Can you imagine that gravity is an invention – a creation?
    It is so profoundly fundamental, basic, and scientifically taken-for-granted, and the irony is that not one scientist can even imagine what it is.
    God is great.

  5. Just because there is a lot of water on Earth does not in any prove Noah’s Flood correct. There are far too many other problems with the story, like how all the animals fit on the boat, how the traveled the length of the planet, how the world was repopulated from only 2 of every species etc. Sorry but it will take more than just an eyeball test for Noah’s Flood to pass.

  6. Well, the point of the pictures above is to address the questions concerning where the water came from and where it went. Those particular questions are easier to answer on Earth, than on Mars, but as Mars demonstrates, difficult questions don’t mean something didn’t happen. No one can answer how the Egyptians built the pyramids so well, yet obviously the pyramids exist. Truth, you see, is not always obvious or easy, but it is still true. That’s why scientists research after all, to figure out hard questions. As for your questions, well how many animals had to fit on the ark? Have you run those numbers? How many animals does it take to reproduce? How does the Bible say the animals traveled to the ark?

  7. I agree with the first sentence of your blog post completely. I started studying the Flood after an atheist from the Free Thinkers at the University of Arkansas told me that there was no geologist in the world who took it seriously. He felt, that the Flood was the easiest thing to disprove. That prompted me to study, and now, I would say the exact opposite is true. I would respectfully say that the very story thought to condemn the Bible, is actually one of the best proofs of it.

    For instance, why do you think God would have to put every species on the ark? Scientifically, that makes no sense. You wouldn’t want every species, you would want every animal from which every species came from. Big difference. So you need something more like the genus category. How many would that make? Think that one through because this is also is your answer for repopulating the earth with a variety of species.

    Just keep looking closer. All of the questions in your blog post have answers, most pretty easy.

  8. All my questions have answers? Please do tell! The blog wasn’t entirely rhetorical (ok some of it was) but these are genuine questions that really have perplexed me. I would be interested in hearing an answer especially if its easily done.

  9. You want me to put a big blog post in a comment? (well, I do have a Mtn. Dew in front of me so this is the perfect time to get into deep discussions… lol) But ok, I’ll try a little but I am pressed for time today so I probably won’t do all the questions justice. There are books written on these subjects ya know! 🙂

    First you have to decide if you want to take God out of the equation. I mean, He’s in the story, did the flood and all that. He also jumped into a bunch of other stories, like when Israel wandered in the desert for 40 years and God fed and watered them Himself. He even kept their clothes from wearing out for all 40 years. In Genesis prior to the flood all the animals started off eating only plants, and in prophecy the Bible says the “lion will eat straw like the ox” so again God doesn’t seem to have problems with the whole carnivorous, herbivore type thing. Nevertheless, you’d probably think it’s a cop-out if I included miracles or God changing anything? I’ll try my best to avoid it, but for the record, I’m convinced there were some miracles along the way. Just seems like that’s God’s MO. Like many animals could have gone into a hibernation period, or like with Daniel and lions den, God would keep them from devouring their prey. IF God flooded the earth, there’s no logical reason for insisting God did not do anything else, especially since God has done very similar things elsewhere.

    So part of this does come down to whether or not we assume God exists or doesn’t exist to begin with.

    But on to the details. Very quickly…

    The mention of the “Sons of God” in Genesis 6 are not really part of the Noah’s flood story. It reads as if the ancient readers already knew who he was talking about and we certainly don’t. Most scholarly opinion rests that they were the sons of Seth (we ARE reading a English translation, the original was written in ancient Hebrew) and some other people believe they were fallen angels. I think that’s goofy like you do, but the idea that Seth had sons is not an unreasonable idea. I have two myself. Also… I wonder sometimes after several Mtn. Dews if Adam and Eve didn’t have other children prior to getting kicked out of the garden. Maybe that’s why they were kicked out, and the garden stayed? Maybe that’s why God told Eve I will greatly increase your pains of childbirth? God DID tell them to have kids before they disobeyed and got kicked out. Any children still in the garden, growing up under God’s care… that would fit. Well I’ve probably had too much Dew.

    As far as why the flood, if there is a God who created the universe, why does it follow that God does not have the right to judge right from wrong, or execute judgment on His creation? He does have that right I would think. We ALL suffer because of evil in our world, but fortunately for us, and for the children in Noah’s day, this world’s suffering is temporary. C.S. Lewis wrote a really good book on this type of thing. The Problem of Pain I think.

    God evidently HAD distinguished in Noah’s day the difference between clean and unclean animals.

    Going by the genus, there are about 16,000 animals on the ark if you include dinosaurs. Assuming God took full-sized everything, even dinosaurs as crazy as that sounds, there was still actually room. These animals would be ancestors of all current species, and scientifically, you HAVE to do it this way precisely because we know that all current species came from a smaller number. All dogs and wolves came from one ancestor. This is known. And we’ve been demonstrating how much variety you can create in a short amount of time empirically with horses and dogs for centuries, selectively breeding them to isolate traits. DNA research has stayed very consistent with the flood, as has population growth research.

    It’s also not an excuse to excuse the insects. The Genesis story itself does that. According to Genesis, and according to the use of Hebrew words in Genesis, the ark contained only animals that breathe through the nostrils, so insects would HAVE to ride on debris someplace else. And yes, lots of them did die. There are a LOT of extinct insects.

    I would guess most animals walked or flew to the ark. All scientific models of Noah’s Flood, and all evolution models of ancient earth believe the continents were jammed up against each other, and later connected by ice bridges. The Bible says later, AFTER the Noah’s Flood story, about when the “earth was divided.” Of course, the difference in the scientific models is that evolutionary ones tend to think it all happened slowly through normal processes. The Flood models are based on a cataclysmic processes which made the same types of things happen much more quickly.

    Even without the land bridges which we know were there, and without the idea of Pangea which everyone agrees on (except the timing) the Bible specifically says God brought them. So if God wanted to bring them from across the ocean, He can. Since it specifically says He brought them, I’m not inserting Him as an excuse. 🙂

    I think we should not assume that the genetic ancestors of all current species, had the same diet limitations, or that all the known plants and foods available today, are the only options available pre-flood. Lots of life has gone extinct from that time. Nevertheless, since they were on a super-continent and didn’t have to travel from the other side of the planet, and the environmental conditions were different, traveling to the center where the ark was, wasn’t out of the question. And diseases are more prevalent today, and would have been less of a concern then.

    Bible says Noah built the ark with 3 decks. Doesn’t say he made stalls but we tend to assume he did. Noah could have stored meat the way ancient sailors did, (I think they used those big sea turtles, kept them alive, killed as needed) and a number of ways were proposed by John Woodmorappe’s “Noah’s Ark: A Feasibility Study.” I would caution there are three things we don’t know: First, what those 16,000 actually ate. Later species, through natural selection could have lost the ability to digest certain foods. It happens. Second, what other plants may have existed and where they existed on a super continent. And three, what God may have stepped in and done food-wise. But assuming those three things don’t apply, then Woodmorappe’s ideas are worth considering because he tried to show mathematically how the animals could have been fed given all the normal problems, given just 8 people, and without any outside help. I’m sure his answers won’t satisfy everyone, but they were well-thought out. But again, we don’t know how the Egyptians made the pyramids either, or the druids made Stonehenge. So not knowing how someone did it, doesn’t prove they didn’t necessarily. I wouldn’t classify those questions of yours to be the easy ones!

    There are ancient methods of food preparation to keep the fresh food from spoiling. And if the ark got in some colder weather then it’s easy to preserve some food.

    The description of the ark’s construction, “Gen 6:16 Make a roof for it, leaving below the roof an opening one cubit high all around….” is perfect for ventilation and for indoor living of animals. It’s how containment farms are ventilated-from the top down. This may be what Noah built above all three decks, but the wording isn’t clear. If he just built it above the top deck, then the window Noah opened later was evidently a different window which he may have built in various places.

    Either way, the ark actually sounds like a place built for animals ventilation wise.

    Reptiles don’t need mom and dad to teach them anything, so it depends on the animal. You could have baby reptiles and baby dinosaurs if you want. Those wouldn’t be the problem size-wise, it would be the mammals like elephants who are dependent on mom and dad for a while. But again, you don’t need every species.

    Some fish do live in fresh water and some in salt water. And lots of fish have gone extinct don’t forget. No one believes all the fish survived the flood or survived evolution either. But there are very large sources of fresh water on the planet, that during a giant tsunami like event, or during a giant flood, would create pockets of fresh water. It happens now, in the ocean. The Amazon river pushes a plume of fresh water into the ocean 250 miles long and about a 100 miles wide. Fresh water also rides on top of the salt water because it’s lighter. It stands to reason then, that there would be pockets and plumes of freshwater in various places and that many fresh water fish stayed alive in them. Also, it stands to reason that many fresh water fish were at one time able to live in the sea, but lost the genetic traits since. Nevertheless, the flood story would mean that lots of fish went extinct and lots of fish have. It would mean some fresh water fish would have to have survived where the waters mixed, and that is possible right now in the right places. You only need two fish to survive.

    And they have to find each other later.

    You assume that Noah and his sons had no experience building boats. For all we know, they were the best boat builders to ever live. We know one thing: The size of the ark is as big as a wooden boat can get. It can’t get much bigger.

    Mount Everest didn’t exist pre-flood in any scientific modeling. The water wouldn’t have gotten that high.

    Although if they got high enough, it would be easier to keep the food fresh!

    The water is in the ocean and on the polar ice caps. Flood models have difficult questions to answer, but where the water went isn’t one of them. The types of things that cause a flood, also explain the drainage. The flood was a cataclysmic event which according to the description in Genesis, would include the oceanic ridge (volcanoes) going off, not just rain for 40 days. It doesn’t just say rain. So all models include the oceanic ridge erupting, the destabilization of the earth’s crust including massive tsunamis and the rise of mountains like Everest. That is why the Bible describes the water as receding back, not just evaporating or disappearing, but draining back off the land into the oceans.

    Every continent shows massive flood plains and sedimentary deposits. Among many other features saying the same thing, the entire continental US has a layer of sand stretching across it with all the grains of sand going the same direction, indicating at one time the continent was under water.

    Evolutionary theories say the same types of things, they just don’t think it all happened at one time. Giant lakes covering most of the US are theorized. Salt water fossils found in the highest point of Oklahoma indicates the State was under ocean type water. Sedimentary chalk running from Texas to Australia via Europe or huge incredibly deep coal deposits which were created by once-living things that were piled up and crushed under extreme pressure to turn them into coal… All of these things are what you would EXPECT to find if there was a Noah’s Flood.

    I gotta quit… too much to do today. There are books on the subject though, and even if you don’t agree with them, it’s food for thought. For myself, I went to a regular university and got a regular degree, and I’m working on an MBA at a regular university as well. So I’ve studied the evolutionary theories, too. I was skeptical of the world-wide flood idea at one time. But while there are tough questions, the geology of it convinced me more than anything. That’s why I keep comparing it to the pyramids. I don’t know how they did everything, but, there they are. And I don’t know how Noah fed every animal per se, but earth features, the giant dinosaur graveyards (which are almost always explained as some sort of watery death) the other features of the fossil record like polystrate fossils, and tree fossils (same condition as other observed violent floods like those from volcanoes) etc…

  10. Hi, sorry we seem to be running out of space so I’ll comment here. It would probably be easier to continue the debate on my blog where it would be easier to refer to my points, but whichever suits.

    First of all you dismiss the fact that God committed the worst genocide in history far too easily. There is an enormous difference between judging people and killing every living creature. Does he have the right to judge innocent children? Seeing as he killed them, how did they fail? What about the animals, what did they do to deserve to die?

    How do you jump from millions of animals to 16,000 (including dinosaurs, really?)? Seeing as the Flood supposedly took place about 4,000 years ago, you would have to believe in an extreme form of evolution that no scientist would back. To use your example, yes dogs and wolves have the same ancestor, but it took them millions of years to evolve. There is an enormous difference between selectively breeding dogs and the theory of evolution.

    If the insects were not on the boat, they would have drowned and there would not be any insects around today. However, there are thousands of insects species around today which casts doubt on the story. A human has a much better chance of surviving a flood than an insect, yet no humans survived so it is ridiculous to suggest that some insects survived on debris (God made it very clear that nothing outside Noah’s Ark would survive)

    It is true that there once was one continent, but that was millions of years ago. Continents do not shift over night and it is absurd to suggest that they shifted in the space of one year. You state without any evidence that the world was essentially one place with one climate and all animals ate the same food that was available everywhere on the climate. Disease is magically not a problem. Listen if you’re simply going to make things up to prove your point, don’t call it a debate. Likewise claiming God got animals across the Ocean somehow (did he teach them to fly?) is just thinking up excuses. Admit it, the story doesn’t make sense and save yourself the embarrassment of these preposterous excuses.

    I discuss Woodmorappe’s claims in my post, and they’re poor excuses and wishful thinking. Ancient sailors never traveled for a year because they couldn’t keep food that long. Food spoilage was an enormous problem (and sea turtles take up a lot of space). You vaguely claim that maybe, possibly animals changed tastes as they evolved. Its an enormous jump to go from there to assuming they were all feed a similar diet. We actually do have a rough idea of how the Egyptian built the pyramids and it doesn’t involve assuming God used magic.

    The roof Noah used is tiny and nowhere near enough for all the animals on board. If there was 3 decks how were the animals on the bottom decks supposed to get fresh air?

    You again ignore my point about animals needing to be taught to hunt and survive. This is true of mammals, so how did they survive?

    You’re clutching at straws with the fish. The disturbance to their climate would have been cataclismic to all marine life and would have destroyed most of it, slat water and fresh water. Claiming there were pockets of fresh water is clutching at straws.

    “Mount Everest didn’t exist pre-flood in any scientific modeling.”
    Says who? Scietists know that Mount Everest is millions of years old, it didn’t suddenly appear 4000 years ago. I have no idea what scientific modeling you mean..

    “Although if they got high enough, it would be easier to keep the food fresh!”
    Yes and also they would all have frozen to death.

    “It doesn’t just say rain.”
    It actually does. At the risk of making you look stupid, you do realise that water doesn’t come from volcanoes? At that heat water would evaporate

    “The types of things that cause a flood, also explain the drainage.”
    So the water went back into volcanoes and the sky? Or were polar caps formed instantly and not over millions of years? How could the water go back into the ocean when it was obviously already flooded?

    “All of these things are what you would EXPECT to find if there was a Noah’s Flood.”
    No. Sorry, but no. Its not there. You are showing signs of a typical case of confirmation bias. You want to believe so badly, that any scrap counts as evidence, while you ignore the glaring holes in the story. I’m sorry but Noah’s Flood never happened.

  11. So to start with, you’re saying that the God who gave life to Creation, is not allowed to take life? Why not? Why do you expect God to hold murderers accountable and to step in for certain situations, but you do not think it’s right for God to hold all of us accountable and to step in for other situations?

  12. Do you realise what you’re doing? You are defending genocide! Just think about that.

    There is an enormous difference between holding murderers accountable and exterminating almost all life.

  13. Do you realize what you are doing? You are pretending to answer questions, and to ask questions, pretending to be offended by remaining unanswered.
    Well, answer the question I asked you…the one for which you have only one answer available to you: magic.
    The question is: What is gravity?
    ….To address your last statement, the one about there being an enormous difference between holding murderers accountable and exterminating almost all life, God gives and God takes away. He is God. He does hold out the offer to you: eternal life with Him. The alternative is eternal life without Him. You are eternal…inexterminable. You will see, sooner or later. I opt for sooner!

  14. Think it through. (and genocide is technically not the correct term) You do believe that a judge can hold murderers accountable, but you don’t think that God can hold the human race accountable? What, you don’t think he has that authority? A judge has a authority to judge certain matters, how is it that God doesn’t have authority to judge all matters? It seems that’s what you are saying. It’s seems you are saying God doesn’t exist and here’s one reason why… because he judges the human race or He takes away life. But He’s the Creator! Didn’t life come from Him? Didn’t God provide a way of escape in the ark? It took 100 years to build it. Anyone could have got on it. Death was not God’s choice, the ark was. Didn’t God give commands, condemn evil, and call mankind to repent? And yet you want to argue now that God doesn’t have the authority to judge us after He gave us life, called us to obey Him, and even provided a way to escape judgment? This doesn’t seem logical. We want God to make everything nice, and we condemn God for any judgment, but we escape ALL responsibility to heed his warnings, to repent of doing wrong, or to obey the one who gave us life itself? You see the reason it’s not “genocide” or any other “cide” is because there is one who has the authority to execute judgment, the one who gave life, set the laws, and patiently provided mercy to all who would accept it.

  15. Dude….

    NOOOO it doesn’t just say rain. How can I have a discussion with you if you refuse to even read the original story?

    Go read the flood story in Genesis 6 – 8, and check out some Flood models, and then get back to me. Here are some flood models to read up on…

    But to answer a few questions:

    Sorry to offend you, but I thought we were in a friendly conversation so I felt free to ramble a bit. It appears, however, that anything I say can and will be used against me. lol Fine. Well if empirical science means anything, then yes 16,000 original animals are the origins of all others, but this isn’t extreme evolution from a a dog to a horse. C’mon. These are genetic traits that break DOWN into different types (species) of the SAME animal. Genetics has no problem with this, and if you need an example just take humans. At the standard rate of 2.5 kids per family, accounting for wars and disease, the human race would grow from 8 people to 6.5 billion in 4 thousand years. Works out perfect, ain’t that cool? And DNA research says the human race came from 4 original DNA groups. By coincidence, that’s how many were on the ark. You can’t disprove the ark with science, but if you do the math, you can prove it. You reject it because it sounds unreasonable to you, not because you’ve run the numbers.

    Why would insects have drown if they weren’t on the ark? You don’t think any debris floats? Trees don’t float? Chunks of land or ice broken off by the cataclysm wouldn’t float? How did that house float across the pacific after the Japan tsunami? For the record, I’m sure some insects road on the ark, and a lot of other pieces of things.

    How do you know the super-continent was millions of years ago? You realize that the idea they were millions of years ago, assumes the flood didn’t happen, and assumes a cataclysm played no role in the super-continent? But what do you mean no evidence? Everyone believes in the super-continent. The disagreement is how long ago. I have the same evidence anyone else has, the difference is the explanation of the evidence.

    I did not make up excuses, I told you what science says and the Bible says. The Bible says God brought them. That’s what it says. Can you prove that’s not what the story said? If the story said it, then it’s not an excuse. And the science of it says they wouldn’t have to cross the oceans. Can you show me any proof they HAD to cross the oceans? Prove there was no ice-bridge, no land bridge, no super-continent?

    Please. The best you can do is claim that super-continent didn’t exist at that time. Of course, if it did, your case is shot. Your argument therefore rests on an assumption. Assumptions are perfectly fine, but they can’t disprove anything.

    I didn’t say the world was one climate, I said we don’t know what the climate was like pre-flood.

    Disease was magically a problem in your column. Prove yours first. You claimed two animals that God called to the ark couldn’t make it because they would magically contract diseases. So God can call them, but he can’t get them there? What sort of God is that? You have no idea if disease was a problem or not. All I did was state that diseases were less of a problem then. I believe so for two reasons. 1. Because God originally created life without disease, so earlier in the earth’s history, it seems reasonable that disease would less of a problem. 2. The evidence today says disease is increasingly a problem, so it stands to reason it was less in the distant past. 3. The fossil record doesn’t show rampant disease.

    That’s like science and stuff.

    The only way I could say the story doesn’t make sense, is if I didn’t pay much attention to what the story actually says… and doesn’t say. Your strawman doesn’t make sense I admit, but the story holds up fine.

    Your commentary on Woodmorappe falls short in my opinion. As he said, animals have regularly been fed year-old hay, in Biblical times people knew how to store feed stuffs for 3 years, and ancient Romans stored various grains for DECADES. Woodmorappe also points out that people in ancient times knew how to preserve meat and fish for a year. Some types of meat lasted 3 years. Certain fresh food types and even fruit can last for a year or most of one. The Chinese store eggs for several years. And the Romans preserved foods such as berries, leaves, roots and fresh meats in blubber or oil. This just touches on the subject. The giant sea turtles didn’t even need to be fed for a year because they can go without food themselves. So regardless of how long the Vikings stayed at sea, the sea turtles could have been used on a year long voyage. The ancient Romans preserved FRESH meat in honey, too. Certain fish that can be preserved fresh in a dormant state were also used in ancient times.

    In other words, to quote you…. we actually do have a rough idea of how Noah could have fed the animals on the ark. A much better idea than we do about the pyramids.

    But by definition, God can use magic whenever he wants to. You have to prove he doesn’t exist to make that argument work.

    The ventilation argument falls totally flat. It’s based on ignorance of how ventilation works. All modern indoor animal housing units use a similar ventilation principle described in the ark. I happen to know because a long time ago I managed such a facility with 10,000 animals. We ventilated the same way the ark did. So for me, this argument that people make about the ventilation is roll my eyes goofy.

    I didn’t ignore your argument about animals needing mom and dad to teach them how to hunt and survive. Ignore means not saying anything about it and I did. I think mammals who were old enough to go without mom and dad WERE the passengers which makes the entire argument moot, reptiles don’t get taught anything by mom and dad to begin with so they don’t matter, and animals nature plays a role as well in helping them survive, so it probably depends on the animal. A small number of them by the way. All God had to do was take animals that knew how to hunt already.

    Since there are already giant (250 miles by 100 miles at the Amazon) pockets of fresh water… I am not grasping at straws. That’s just the fact. And lots of fish DID die as the fossil record shows. You would have to be able to prove that a world-wide cataclysmic flood would have killed ALL marine life though. That’s quite an assumption.

    Mount Everest did not exist in any pre-flood scientific modeling, says every Flood model. If you didn’t know that these theories have been run through geologic computer models, well.. they have. The guy who designed one of the first and most famous geologic computer models at Los Alamos is a young earth creationist.

    If they got high enough they would have frozen to death? But you don’t know exactly how high they got, so how can you know they froze to death? You KNOW they got higher than Everest? Prove it.

    How does the water go back into the ocean after a tsunami today? Think it through.

    The same things that cause the flood, also lead you to the answer of why it drained. In the Flood models, massive upheaval under the ocean set off the oceanic ridge and caused giant tsunami’s world-wide. Most of the planet is covered by water. It’s not hard to flood it if you can create big enough tsunami action. Much easier to do that here than on Mars or Tatooine.

    See, it’s not that I want to believe so badly, because I wasn’t always sure of a world-wide flood. I believe because I’ve taken the time to look at the science of it, instead of dismissing it out of hand. Noah’s Flood explains all the evidence, much better in my opinion, than the common theories of uniformitarianism. The problem is, if the flood happened, then the age of the earth is up for grabs, so you are required to deny it.

  16. How does that in anyway describe gravity? If I was an ancient Israelite, I would presume this was just a metaphor not something discussing science. If I looked into it, I might presume that doors surrounded the Earth and stopped the waters from falling off the end of the Earth. There is no way anyone reading the Bible would have got gravity from this. You are seeing what you want to see.

  17. Hang on I’m getting to it, its quite long, so it’ll take a while. Simply because gravity is great doesn’t mean God created it or God is real or any claim of Christianity is true. That’s why I didn’t initially answer your question, because it leads nowhere and can be neither proven true nor false.

  18. Ok the comments section is getting very messy, so I’m not sure where this will end up but its a reply to the comment beginning “Think it through. (and genocide is technically not the correct term)”

    Genocide is the extermination of an entire race, ethnic group, religion or other community. The Flood (if true) would be the greatest extermination of a race in history. You continually miss the point. Why is God holding children to account when they haven’t done anything? What could a child though to deserve death? How could every single person be evil? Surely there must have been more than just Noah.

    Just because God created the world, does not mean he has the right to kill everything on it. My parents created me but that does not mean they have a right to kill me. A builder does not have the right to destroy a house he built.

    “Didn’t God provide a way of escape in the ark? It took 100 years to build it. Anyone could have got on it.”
    I have no idea where you are getting this from. I reread the story and no mention is made of people be allowed to board the Ark or of any warnings given. When Noah’s Flood occurred God had not given any rules or commandments to mankind or so how were they supposed to obey?

    However, the main point is not, who has authority, it is that mass extermination took place. I hate to break Goodwin’s Law or to write in all caps, but you are pushing me to the limits. Millions of people died, how do you not see what’s wrong with the this. If you think killing every living creature is an example of “patiently provided mercy to all who would accept it.” then you will believe anything.

  19. Well, it’s nice to see that you are anti-abortion.
    Apparently you have had no children, if you are not aware that they are sinners from birth.
    What in the world do you mean that a man who builds a house does not have the right to destroy it? I built my house, as a matter of fact, and I have the right to destroy it.

  20. Ok your comment is long enough to read, so I can only glance at one or two of your links now, I’ll have to come back to them later.

    ” It appears, however, that anything I say can and will be used against me”
    Isn’t that how debates work? You say something and then I reply to it? Would you prefer if I ignored your comments. Look, I’m all for a friendly discussion, but I draw the line at defending mass murder. I don’t take that stuff lightly.

    ” this isn’t extreme evolution from a a dog to a horse. C’mon.”
    I know that, but even saying two monkeys evoloved into the 264 species we have today in only 4000 years is not possible.

    “At the standard rate of 2.5 kids per family, accounting for wars and disease, the human race would grow from 8 people to 6.5 billion in 4 thousand years.”
    You do realise this would require massive inbreeding with accompanying severe genetic damage and retardation? You don’t have to be a scientist to know that mass inbreeding doesn’t end well.

    “And DNA research says the human race came from 4 original DNA groups.”
    Yes four groups (comprising thousands of people) not four people

    “Why would insects have drown if they weren’t on the ark? You don’t think any debris floats?”
    Yes trees and houses float, but if they did, then surely humans could too and that would defeat the point of the flood. Its aim was to kill everything so its pretty clear that God wouldn’t have left the chance of some evil children or evil animals of surviving. Also what where they supposed to eat for a year?

    Okay, I’m trying my best to respond to you, really I am. But you have no idea about science. You simply claim anything based on the Bible and presume that is just as good as scientists who have spent their entire lives studying this. This isn’t a case of your word against theirs. If you want to ignore all evidence and stick with your pre-existing beliefs then fine, but I pity you. Open your mind and consider other possibilities. With a heavy heart, I continue

    “Everyone believes in the super-continent. The disagreement is how long ago. I have the same evidence anyone else has, the difference is the explanation of the evidence.”
    The evidence is that the continents drifted slowly over millions of years, not in a single year or less.

    “I did not make up excuses, I told you what science says and the Bible says. The Bible says God brought them. That’s what it says. Can you prove that’s not what the story said? If the story said it, then it’s not an excuse. And the science of it says they wouldn’t have to cross the oceans. Can you show me any proof they HAD to cross the oceans? Prove there was no ice-bridge, no land bridge, no super-continent?”

    All scientists agree that 4000 years ago the continents looked the same as they do today. The last super continent was 300 million years ago. If you want to completely ignore science and make up something in its place, fine but its making excuses, no matter what the Bible says.

    “I didn’t say the world was one climate, I said we don’t know what the climate was like pre-flood.”
    Unless it was one climate, your argument is flawed. And yes we know what the climate was like 4000 years ago. It was similar to what we have today.

    “Disease was magically a problem in your column. Prove yours first.”
    What? You want me to prove that animals get disease? Isn’t that a bit obvious? Especially if they’re in a new climate and around new animals they’ve never met before. This isn’t magic, its common sense.

    I notice you seem to be claiming that God used magic to solve every problem. If so, he must have used magic a hundred times, which begs the question, why bother with a flood? Why not magically kill everyone and say the trouble of a flood? Why bother with an ark and just create a magic bubble around Noah and the animals? Why not create life anew after the flood? If magic is the answer to every problem, then the story is pointless.

    “That’s like science and stuff.”
    No, no its not. It really isn’t. You really don’t seem to understand what science is. It isn’t wishing area inconvenient facts. It isn’t using magic to solve every problem. This isn’t science.

    “But by definition, God can use magic whenever he wants to. You have to prove he doesn’t exist to make that argument work.”
    Okay, I’m out. I give up. This isn’t going to work. It was nice at first to hear another point of view, but this is just ridiculous. You will literally say anything at all. This isn’t a debate, its a sham. I tried, but there’s no getting through to you. There comes a point in every internet debate, where it just gets too daft and pointless. This is the point where I throw up my hands and say I’m out. You may think this means you win, but it doesn’t, it really doesn’t. Please do me a favour and read. Learn about the world and how it works. Don’t wallow in ignorance and clutching at straws to convince yourself that you’re right and the world is wrong. Its only a story, it didn’t really happen. Stop doing intellectual somersaults to try and explain it. If you’re reduced to using magic as an excuse for everything, then you know you’ve lost.

  21. Brian,
    Robert Neilsen is correct when he says this thread is getting messy.
    I am going to withdraw and watch…for his answer to “What is gravity?”.
    Robert fits my definition or religious: “adhering to that set of rules by which I know I’m ok…and you’re not”, when he says that the thought of an “innocent” baby being a sinner is abhorrent, disgusting, and discredits religion.
    I agree in a roundabout way, for I believe all religion, including his, needs discrediting…

  22. Well Robert, I draw the line at defending mass murder, too. Again, please think this through for a moment. Surely you understand that for centuries, literally billions of people have NOT looked upon God as a mass murderer, and still don’t? That indicates there IS another opinion, unless you believe that 80 percent of Americans are defending a mass murderer because they believe in God (and think positively of him)? Or perhaps you, like many atheists, just think everyone else is less intelligent or less evolved? Even so, why are you outraged at a PASTOR because I believe in God and think positively of him? I’m a pastor, what did you expect? Isn’t it obvious that a pastor probably doesn’t define God as a mass murderer, or do you think all pastors were cheering the Sandy Hook massacre?

    Obviously, I do not accept your definition of mass murder because I don’t believe it’s “murder” or “mass murder” when someone has the authority to execute judgment. Just as a judge has the authority to judge someone, God has the authority as well. He has ultimate authority, why would he not as Creator?

    But in the end, why are you outraged at any murder at all? What moral basis do you have? How can you, a mere accident of chemicals and natural selection, claim that your view of murder is inherently morally better than anyone else’s? Mass murderers and Mother Theresa all have the same fate and there is no difference. There is no God, no hope, no right, no wrong, no moral law that transcends anyone. Whatever you believe is good for you, and whatever anyone else believes is good for them. Who is to say one set of morality is better? It’s just the chemicals in our brains organizing themselves because of evolution. Any outrage you feel at murder I suspect, is because the moral law that came from God still feels “right” to you. After all, if we were mere animals, why would we care what happened to anyone 4000 years ago? What evolutionary purpose would that serve? I think the fact you would draw the line at defending a mass murderer, is proof that God exists. If he doesn’t, there’s no logical point at drawing the line anywhere other than your immediate needs for evolutionary progression of the human race.

    Anyway, you’re correct I did write a lot of stuff in response to your lot of stuff. I usually don’t get into the long rants that you guys always throw at us Christians online. You guys are really into labeling everything, too, like mass murder, or magic (which is anytime God does something) or what is officially “science” etc…so you can dismiss what you want and keep what you want. So in interest of time I’ll stop here, but I do encourage you to check out those links and perhaps realize that no matter how you try to label things, the question is did it happen and is it true? Labels don’t change a thing. Dinosaurs were called “dragons” for most of human history you know, but labeling them dinosaurs or dragons or magic or anything else, doesn’t change the fact they existed. You can call what God has done “magic” if you want, but it still happened, he exists, and he did a few things along the way. I haven’t lost an argument by stating the obvious.

  23. A “baby being a sinner is abhorrent” is an emotional straw man argument which applies an atheistic worldview to God. From my Christian worldview, the baby wasn’t a sinner at all, and any suffering the baby went through in this world as a result of evil is replaced by eternal life free of any suffering or pain. Death in this world is the ultimate injustice to the atheist, but for a Christian, death has been defeated. Where O death is your victory? Where O death is your sting? Death’s days are numbered, and it can’t win anyway.

  24. It was my fault. I responded to all of his points instead of just taking one or two. I was in the mood to discuss stuff and didn’t mean to start the long debates. I didn’t have time for it this week! lol

  25. I stand by what I said on all the other things as well. Most of the points I made, that you scoffed at, was me just repeating what scientists said, with real research to back them up.

  26. I’m not sure if this “baby being born…” response is to me or to Robert, but from my Christian worldview, all are sinners, even babies…though I do hold that until the person is aware of sin, he is not responsible, and so I subscribe to an “age-of-accountability” view.

  27. Yep. Without God, death in this world is horrible because there is nothing else, but with God, there’s hope, there’s eternal life, there’s a whole lot more than just this pain-ridden world.

  28. Hydroplate theory answers a lot of these questions. Also, Robert employed the “No True Scottsman” Fallacy, and you should call him out on it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s