Is the great biblical flood real or not?

[Zmouth]

It is interesting that someone who claims to believe in God would say that if the answer is not the same way as they interpret the scriptures them then God is a liar.

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 2 Peter 1:20

And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel. Ezek 14:9

Then again, it is written in John 3:11 that if one walks by faith in God then they will speak that which they know and testify to that which they have seen.

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. John 8:44

Thus, if one has come to the knowledge of the truth then they are aware that by two immutable things in which it is impossible for God to lie. In such, when they see that what they believe contradicts what is known they would have you believe that you must disregard the immutable things.

+++++++++++++++++​

And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud:And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh. And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth. Genesis 9:14-16

And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: John 8:23

+++++++++++++++++

And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. Genesis 1:9

The earth is almost 98% salt water, so where did the fresh water come from? A better question is when salt water evaporates then does condensation turn back into salt water?

Fresh water on earth resulted from the evaporation of salt water that originally covered the entire face of the earth [See Genesis 1:2] ​

​

 

[Hizikyah]

I have no affiliation with this or any group however this a a really awesome video concerning this topic

[video=youtube;A0FWe7PlPBo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0FWe7PlPBo[/video]

 

[Sagart]

Because some who claim to be Christians believe that they are smarter and wiser than God Himself. All of the so-called "scholars" and "critics" (both Higher and Lower) who attack the Bible are in that category. But in fact they are emissaries of the Devil, since his primary mode of attack is to deceive people into disbelieving the Bible.

Disagreeing with a man or a woman’s interpretation of the Bible when that interpretation can easily be proved to be incorrect and based upon ignorance of the Bible is not attacking the Bible—it is attacking ignorance and foolishness in the phony guise of spirituality.

 

[trofimus]

I have no affiliation with this or any group however this a a really awesome video concerning this topic

[video=youtube;A0FWe7PlPBo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0FWe7PlPBo[/video]

7th day adventist preacher. Strongly for the KJV. Promotes vegan diet. Creationist.

Yeah, this video will be really neutral, objective etc

 

[Hizikyah]

7th day adventist preacher. Strongly for the KJV. Promotes vegan diet. Creationist.

Yeah, this video will be really neutral, objective etc

I personally dont care what their doctrines are, I follow the Scriptures, but the archeological evidence in this vid is really awesome.

 

[trofimus]

I personally dont care what their doctrines are, I follow the Scriptures, but the archeological evidence in this vid is really awesome.

Can be.

I would recommend to learn about theistic evolution from e.g. biologos.org, about old earth and local flood from e.g. reasons.org, about creationism from creationists etc, though.

When a young earth creationist makes a presentation about evolution or old earth or local flood, it will never be the best efford he can make, because he already has an opposite inclination. Similar to a RCC priest talking about protestantism.

 

[Bogadile]

Theistic evolution? I've never even heard of such a disease.

I think you mean Lord God created the earth. That is the truth. Evolution is incompatible with the Bible.

 

[Hizikyah]

Can be.

I would recommend to learn about theistic evolution from e.g. biologos.org, about old earth and local flood from e.g. reasons.org, about creationism from creationists etc, though.

When a young earth creationist makes a presentation about evolution or old earth or local flood, it will never be the best efford he can make, because he already has an opposite inclination. Similar to a RCC priest talking about protestantism.

personally I have read a number of books on history concerning this and similar matters and watched documentaries and lectures, there is definitly value in them all even if it's a small nugget or even if they are trying to disprove someting always shines through, I will give it a look.

 

[trofimus]

Theistic evolution? I've never even heard of such a disease.

I think you mean Lord God created the earth. That is the truth. Evolution is incompatible with the Bible.

Thats weird that you have never heard it. But you can always google it and learn something new.

For example the leading scientist of team that came with a human genome is a theistic evolutionist.

 

[Zmouth]

Evolution is incompatible with the Bible.

So in Genesis 1:2 did the earth bring forth the vegetation in the process of time or did it occur in one day?

"And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD." Genesis 4:3

"...the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind.: " Genesis 1:12

 

[Hizikyah]

So in Genesis 1:2 did the earth bring forth the vegetation in the process of time or did it occur in one day?

"And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD." Genesis 4:3

"...the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind.: " Genesis 1:12

He created all the plants, but as the sun shoines on them they grow

Genesis/Bereshith 1:29, "And the Mighty One said, “See, I have given you every plant that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed, to you it is for food."

 

[Bladerunner]

I have no doubt that the flood of Noah's time did happen in real history. Not only do I believe it as an assertion of Scripture, but I also believe it based on visible evidence.

If you're having trouble loading images, check the Singles forum; there is a sticky post at the top on uploading images.

OK fellows, it all comes down to on simple task about Noah's Flood or anything else GOD WORD (The Bible) tells us. That one simple task is: You either believe all that HE said or you don't. There is NO in between. You Faith has to be complete for anyone to truly believe in Jesus Christ.

ask yourself that question...If I do not believe in Noah's flood then How can I totally believe in Jesus.

Having said that, Mankind's science is confirming the Bible little bit by little bit. You see we bit by bit learn a grain of salts worth of knowledge enough to prove what God created and has /is controlled/controlling everything. As in Noah's Flood, Science is only recently becoming able to confirm it existed.

Yes, I believe in GOD's WORD totally without doubt therefore, My belief and Jesus Christ is also complete.

 

[RexCA]

did Noah exist and did a flood happen yes do I believe the entire earth was covered in a literal sense probably not more likely than not these verses are allegorical but at the same time referencing a real event that did happen we see similar events recorded in other local religious texts such as the Epic of Gilgamesh more likely than not it is referring to the Black Sea floods which where a recorded geological event in the same area as Noah is said to have lived sometime around 5600 BC. Massive floods in the areas of modern day Eurasia and the middle east where common in the 4,083 years give or take between the end of the ice age and the black sea floods. The ice age is said to have ended sometime around 9,683 BC. Now if such dates bother you or if the possibility of allegory bothers you because you are a young earth creationist or a "biblical literalist" do not even bother replying to this such ideas I will not even bother arguing against.

 

[Dino246]

... Now if such dates bother you or if the possibility of allegory bothers you because you are a young earth creationist or a "biblical literalist" do not even bother replying to this such ideas I will not even bother arguing against.

So... you get to spew your belief without challenge? I don't think so. This is a Bible Discussion forum; if you have a problem with people who don't agree with you replying to your posts, you're in the wrong place.

There is plenty of evidence around the world pointing to a global flood. The methods used to come up with such dates are suspect at best.

 

[Zmouth]

OK fellows, it all comes down to on simple task about Noah's Flood or anything else GOD WORD (The Bible) tells us.

Do you mean like the scripture which says that man does not live by their interpretation of Bible alone but by every word that proceedeth from the mouth of the LORD doth man live?

ask yourself that question...If I do not believe in Noah's flood then How can I totally believe in Jesus.

What is the garment that the LORD covered the earth with if you believe Jesus who said you shall also bear witness because you have been with him from the beginning?
[See John 15:27]

Yes, I believe in GOD's WORD totally without doubt

If faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth:
John 16:13

 

[Sagart]

why cant folks just believe the bible?

It is not a matter of believing or disbelieving the Bible; it is a matter of believing or disbelieving the old Roman Catholic tradition that says that Gen. 1-11 is to be understood as an accurate account of historic events. The Roman Catholic Church has since abandoned that tradition as being untenable. When we consider how very deeply entrenched the Roman Catholic Church is in tradition, we see that it must have had some very solid reasons for abandoning that tradition. Some of those reasons likely included the following facts:

• There are today about 2,000,000 genetically distinct populations of animals living on the earth. If we assume a date of about 2,349 B.C. (Bishop Ussher’s date), microevolution reduces the number of “kinds” of animals that must have been aboard the ark (to account for the about 2,000,000 genetically distinct populations of animals living on the earth today) to a few hundred thousand “kinds.”
• The few hundred thousand of “kinds” of animals, including the dinosaurs, mammoths, giant ground sloths, etc., which have become extinct must also be considered. Did they all become extinct before the flood? If not, they were, according to the account in Genesis, aboard the ark.
• The ark, as literally described in Genesis, was much too small because the amount of water that it would be capable of displacing would weigh less than the animals, cages, and food on board, thus making it impossible for the ark to float.
• The floor space on the ark was too small to hold any more than a tiny fraction of the cages that would be necessary to keep the animals in place (and from eating each other).
• The amount of food required for the animals would weigh at least nearly as much as the animals, and would require a vast amount of storage space.
• Many of the animals aboard the ark would have required specific FRESH fruits, vegetables, leaves, grass, bark, roots, etc., including fresh fruits that are produced only on MATURE plants. Therefore, these mature plants would necessarily have been kept and maintained aboard the ark, and subsequently planted in the ground after the flood.
• Most of the genetically discrete populations of fish (including many VERY LARGE fish) would have to be taken aboard the ark and kept in tanks of water that met their very specific water chemistry needs in order to survive.
• The weight of the water on the earth would have crushed to death any of the land plants that did not drown in the water.
• After 150 days when the water abated, there would be no vegetation on the earth for the herbivores to eat, and no meat for the carnivores to eat, therefore a vast amount of food would necessarily have been kept aboard the ark to sustain the animals AFTER the flood.
• The Animals could not all be released all at once or in the same place because many of them would eat each other.
• The coming of the animals to Noah from all over the earth would have been a physical impossibility no less impossible than Santa Clause delivering presents to every boy and girl on the night before Christmas. The polar bears and penguins, not to mention all of the unique kinds of animals in Australia, would have posed more than a few special difficulties.
• After the flood, the animals could not be returned to their original habitat because all habitats would have been destroyed by the flood.
• Many of the necessary habitats would take 50 years or more to be reestablished and their reestablishment would have required the effort of many thousands of persons.
• Until all the necessary habitats could be reestablished, the animals requiring these habitats would have to be kept and cared for by Noah and his family.
• There was not enough water to cover the entire earth, and even if there was, where did it go after the flood?
• If the reported sightings of the Ark are factual, the Ark came to rest on a VERY high mountain on VERY rugged terrain from which the large majority of the animals would not have been able to descend.

The narrative of Noah’s Ark cannot be a literal account of an historic event. Indescribably huge and very numerous miracles would have been necessary, and a literal interpretation of Genesis does not allow for these miracles because the whole point of the narrative is that through the natural, physical means of an ark built by Noah and his family, mankind and all the kinds of animals were saved from the floodwaters.

 

[RexCA]

So... you get to spew your belief without challenge? I don't think so. This is a Bible Discussion forum; if you have a problem with people who don't agree with you replying to your posts, you're in the wrong place.

There is plenty of evidence around the world pointing to a global flood. The methods used to come up with such dates are suspect at best.

like I said I do believe Noah was a real person I do believe that there was a flood but I think how the scriptures say it was up to the clouds is an allegory for it being a very large flood much less I don't think I can't discuss my views with others I'm not that arrogant but I do think that young earth creationism and complete biblical literalism are not credible or rational views

 

[Bladerunner]

It is not a matter of believing or disbelieving the Bible; it is a matter of believing or disbelieving the old Roman Catholic tradition that says that Gen. 1-11 is to be understood as an accurate account of historic events. The Roman Catholic Church has since abandoned that tradition as being untenable. When we consider how very deeply entrenched the Roman Catholic Church is in tradition, we see that it must have had some very solid reasons for abandoning that tradition. Some of those reasons likely included the following facts:

• There are today about 2,000,000 genetically distinct populations of animals living on the earth. If we assume a date of about 2,349 B.C. (Bishop Ussher’s date), microevolution reduces the number of “kinds” of animals that must have been aboard the ark (to account for the about 2,000,000 genetically distinct populations of animals living on the earth today) to a few hundred thousand “kinds.”
• The few hundred thousand of “kinds” of animals, including the dinosaurs, mammoths, giant ground sloths, etc., which have become extinct must also be considered. Did they all become extinct before the flood? If not, they were, according to the account in Genesis, aboard the ark.
• The ark, as literally described in Genesis, was much too small because the amount of water that it would be capable of displacing would weigh less than the animals, cages, and food on board, thus making it impossible for the ark to float.
• The floor space on the ark was too small to hold any more than a tiny fraction of the cages that would be necessary to keep the animals in place (and from eating each other).
• The amount of food required for the animals would weigh at least nearly as much as the animals, and would require a vast amount of storage space.
• Many of the animals aboard the ark would have required specific FRESH fruits, vegetables, leaves, grass, bark, roots, etc., including fresh fruits that are produced only on MATURE plants. Therefore, these mature plants would necessarily have been kept and maintained aboard the ark, and subsequently planted in the ground after the flood.
• Most of the genetically discrete populations of fish (including many VERY LARGE fish) would have to be taken aboard the ark and kept in tanks of water that met their very specific water chemistry needs in order to survive.
• The weight of the water on the earth would have crushed to death any of the land plants that did not drown in the water.
• After 150 days when the water abated, there would be no vegetation on the earth for the herbivores to eat, and no meat for the carnivores to eat, therefore a vast amount of food would necessarily have been kept aboard the ark to sustain the animals AFTER the flood.
• The Animals could not all be released all at once or in the same place because many of them would eat each other.
• The coming of the animals to Noah from all over the earth would have been a physical impossibility no less impossible than Santa Clause delivering presents to every boy and girl on the night before Christmas. The polar bears and penguins, not to mention all of the unique kinds of animals in Australia, would have posed more than a few special difficulties.
• After the flood, the animals could not be returned to their original habitat because all habitats would have been destroyed by the flood.
• Many of the necessary habitats would take 50 years or more to be reestablished and their reestablishment would have required the effort of many thousands of persons.
• Until all the necessary habitats could be reestablished, the animals requiring these habitats would have to be kept and cared for by Noah and his family.
• There was not enough water to cover the entire earth, and even if there was, where did it go after the flood?
• If the reported sightings of the Ark are factual, the Ark came to rest on a VERY high mountain on VERY rugged terrain from which the large majority of the animals would not have been able to descend.

The narrative of Noah’s Ark cannot be a literal account of an historic event. Indescribably huge and very numerous miracles would have been necessary, and a literal interpretation of Genesis does not allow for these miracles because the whole point of the narrative is that through the natural, physical means of an ark built by Noah and his family, mankind and all the kinds of animals were saved from the floodwaters.

Sagart.. I will not argue with you as I have stated my position and you have stated yours. It is your choice but I think you need to do some more studies from a different source. If I rem, correctly there were only 13-15,000 Kinds of animals.... Rem, these were LAND animals and birds.

I recommend that you look to youtube and Dr. Kent Hovin. He has taught the flood for many years and you would be able to get a treasure trove of infomation.

have a blessed evening
Blade

 

[Sagart]

Sagart.. I will not argue with you as I have stated my position and you have stated yours. It is your choice but I think you need to do some more studies from a different source. If I rem, correctly there were only 13-15,000 Kinds of animals.... Rem, these were LAND animals and birds.

I recommend that you look to youtube and Dr. Kent Hovin. He has taught the flood for many years and you would be able to get a treasure trove of infomation.

have a blessed evening
Blade

I began researching the subject of the Genesis Flood in 1971, and I have read hundreds of books, articles, papers, arguments, etc., and have watched countless documentaries and other videos. I have also corresponded at length with so-called young earth scientists who flaunt their Ph.D’s, even though their graduate studies and their doctoral dissertations were in fields that in no way qualified them to have an educated opinion on young earth creationism, the Genesis Flood, or the theory of evolution. Furthermore, none of them had earned so much a B.A. in any field of study relevant to Old or New Testament exegesis. Moreover, these shortcomings are typical of all of the young-earth creationists during the past 65 years!

About 15 years ago, I began researching young earth creationist organizations, and I could scarcely believe the extent of their willful and deliberate misrepresentation of the qualifications of so-called creation scientists. Furthermore, I could scarcely believe the extent of their willful and deliberate misrepresentation of the number of genetically discrete populations (kinds) of land animals that would necessarily have been aboard the ark in order for us to have them with us today. My further research manifested the amount of disagreement there is among the organizations regarding which animals were aboard the ark. Answers in Genesis teaches that there were aboard the ark representatives of each family of animals, rather than each genus or species, and that, through the process of microevolution, we now have a multitude of different “kinds.” A good example is the family Felidae, the cat family, which includes three genera (Felis, Panthera, and Acinonyx) and many species. Such evolution would be full-scale macroevolution, which Answers in Genesis teaches contradicts the Bible! Moreover, anyone with even a basic knowledge of genetics knows that such evolution would take millions of years! The people at Answers in Genesis are very much aware of these facts—but they do not care as long as their misrepresentations steer people away from evolution! Unfortunately, what is true of Answers in Genesis is true of other young earth creationist organizations—they know that they are teaching garbage, but they teach it anyway!

Kent Hovind is unique in the young earth creationist movement because he continues to use discredited arguments that have been abandoned by other organizations in the movement—and he knows full well that his arguments have been discredited because he has been told so by other organizations in the movement! Indeed, apart from the Watch Tower Society (the Jehovah’s Witnesses), I do not know of any religious organizations that are more dishonest and unethical than those in the young earth creationist movement. And like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, their followers unquestioningly believe what they are told regardless of absolute, incontrovertible proof that they are being deceived.

In post #96 of this thread, I posted undeniable facts that absolutely prove that the Genesis Flood could not possibly have occurred as described in Gen. 6-8, but the facts are being ignored because young earth creationists believe what they want to believe instead of the truth.

Genesis 1-11 is a fascinating portion of the Bible that in its own personal and unique way expresses the absolute grandeur and holiness of God and the frailty and sinfulness of man and prefigures the two covenants of Law and Grace and the consequences of living under each of the two covenants. That it is made up of epic tales is made manifest through its description of that which is absolutely impossible taking place through exclusively human means (the Ark that Noah and his family built and the preservation of the animals aboard that Ark). That it is a divinely inspired work is made manifest through its prefiguring of the two covenants in a much more clear manner than we find anywhere else in the Old Testament (the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil).

 

[Zmouth]

He created all the plants, but as the sun shoines on them they grow

Well, the Word is the seed, yet the seed does not grow by light, neither does the seed grow when received into the dry ground (earth). The seed will only begin to grow when it is watered, the higher the salinity of the water the less likely the seed in dry ground has to germinate.

Genesis/Bereshith 1:29, "And the Mighty One said, “See, I have given you every plant that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed, to you it is for food."

Was every plant which yields seed given to man to eat or the seed of every herb? Since the fruit that was given for meat was the seed yielding seed then which tree provides the fruit provides the nutrients found in meat? The nut or the fruit?