To which glacial flood are you referring?
The end of the last glacial period, I added the graphic to clarify.
I found several papers that describe the Holocene sea level changes, but none that took place fast enough to count as a flood.
Not just the rising waters, but also the mega-storms that accompanied them cause massive flooding in the low laying delta regions. Think about the early settlers who moved to Texas only to be killed in flash floods.
Thanks for the articles! Today in our service we studied the story of the man who was blind from birth that Jesus healed. Would you say his blindness was something that would have occurred in the natural world before the fall?
The scripture makes the point that the reason for his disability was so that Christ could be glorified in the healing. To me this would suggest that the man is naturally “broken” to some degree, something that Christ is able to “fix”. I struggle to see these “natural” occurrences of things like blindness to be part of God’s intended order.
Thanks again for the help and encouragement in joining these discussions.
It was 8,500 BCE and 10,500 years ago with a 2 degree increase in temperature that melted the glaciers and created forty-day storms. It did not take much to kill those living in the low planes in mud houses. Flash floods still kill people today.
What is the science behind there being glaciers before a Flood like one alleged in the Bible? I do not agree that melting glaciers caused a flood like the one in Genesis. There are too many events evidenced to say that Genesis would cover them all. Genesis states there was one land area surrounded by seas. Was there major ice before the Flood? If the storms involved in Noah’s Flood also pulled down instantly the cold temperatures from miles above the earth would not ice start forming immediately even during the Flood itself? The evidence we see needs to state there was no Genesis Flood. Why?
I would think that what we see also gives evidence of a Flood like the one in Genesis. The timetable is too much to reconcile. Obviously some organizations are trying, are they going about it the wrong way?
Learned a new term tonight, paleotempestology. The study is of tropical cyclones, or hurricanes to us in North America. No indication of any 40 day storms. The study of the Holocene appears to be to get a better understanding of the natural variation in the number of cyclones.
Ah, this must be the work of Shakespeare scholars attempting to find Miranda, Prospero, and Caliban in the French cave paintings.
I think so.
I don’t know if it totally relates, but if you think about the Incarnation, God became a human baby. He took on our biology with all its weaknesses and fragility. There was presumably nothing extraordinary about Jesus’ physical body. If we could examine his DNA we would find mutations and broken genes. Could God have become incarnate and could Jesus have lived a sinless life if there is something inherent in human biology that is sin damaged? That is why I think sin is a spiritual condition, an identity every human is born into that is actualized by every human’s (except Jesus) choices.
One point about the claim on Jesus’ biology is that he went through all the experiences of humanity. Would this indicate that he had in his body the genetics to experience every dibilitating abnormality known to man? I don’t think I ever viewed Jesus as a supernatural human. Manipulation of nature is not really a force or even a brute strength. It is done by word only.
Here’s a nice summary in comic form of climate for the past 20 kya (no sudden two degree change at your time):
Where do you find these claims at again? There seems to be little accuracy to them When concerning claims about the natural world. That really does concern me that you have some sources that appear to not be based upon actual evidence from the natural world. And you keep bringing them up again and again as if they are accurately describing scientific literature. This is not to say that their supernatural or spiritual claims are all wrong, but many of the claims about the natural world are just simply wrong from what I’ve seen you present from time to time here.
Speculative unrelated note: the desire to find concord between details of ancient writing can provide some fruitful ideas (like in the book the Rocks Don’t Lie) but generally require forcing details from nature events into boxes they cannot fit it. Or with some Old Earth concordists, change the boxes with a little Hebrew magic so they can fit any piece of evidence you need them to.
The data that I reference comes the ETH Zurich and their analysis of the Greenland Ice bores showing year-by-year changes with each layer. (Referenced below) This is logically consistent with the retreating of the glacial ice from Eurasia. The dating of the glacial retreat a matter of public record, as is the rise in temperature. The speculation comes from those who are forcing the ages stated in the Bible to place a global flood some five thousand years ago. There is no evidence of this, not genetic, not linguistic not cultural anthropological nor geological.
But a flood of the fertile delta regions around 8,500 BCE has all these scientific supports, so why are you attacking this?
Ref: Blum, Heiz “Erwärmung bewirkte die Sintflut”, Museion 2000 3/1994 P. 42-46, Print
Does this translate to “warming caused the deluge?” That wouldn’t be an actual source on the history of earths climate. But maybe there are sources in it but I don’t have access to check them nor can I read German.
Nonetheless, it seems that you were trying to talk about a localized flood? Your increase in temperature is also a local increase? That was unclear before and would have been wrong if you did mean a global temperature change.
But you gave enough details I think to figure out what you’re talking about.
Timewise I’m not sure what your goal is but there’s nothing remotely close to:
But aren’t you forcing random details from the Bible into various historical events?
River deltas flood all the time. Do you have something in English to support your theory?
Dear Bill and @pevaquark,
I have spent the last four hours with OCR and Google Translate. I have uploaded Heinz Blum’s article and an English translation to the following address.
Best wishes, Shawn
I have a challenge for you, Steve. In all your posts, your arguments are based on the unchallenged Truth that a perfectly created (or at least sinless) humankind FELL, and that the world’s ‘brokenness’ is the result of that rebellion. Although this belief is common among most evangelicals, the story related in Genesis was not always interpreted thusly.
This will also be evident from so many of @Christy’s posts.
I challenge you to examine a slightly different understanding of Genesis in the light of evolution and common ancestry: The process of evolution acting on various life forms tends to reward the "Selfish Genes" possessed by individuals. Of course evolution can promote self-sacrifice in parents (especially mothers) in raising offspring, thus perpetuating their genes. But animal behavior that is unequivocal evidence for love and empathy is relatively rare.
Let us suppose that our Creator God possess these qualities, love & empathy, to the nth degree and would like them displayed in His Creation. But ‘forcing’ them, puppet-like, onto a particular animal type would not do. Like Pinnochio, attaining empathy and love had to be from free choice. God’s gift of Mind & Conscience allowed Homo sapiens to choose to rise above the animal nature of their biological progenitors–to actually be co-creators with God–to act in His Image and build the better world of the future.
To reject this Invitation is to Fall into Sin. For sure, It does have universal ramifications. @jammycakes has cited the current belief that the Holocene extinction is not merely a repetition of past die-offs but is actually is the result of humankind mis-using their co-creative powers. Planet Earth is a marvelous creation–far beyond our current understanding. The photo of the earth rising above the surface of the moon is a truly holy image, since it reminds us of the Scriptural admonition to behave as stewards of our earthly home. But are we willing to sacrifice anything in the present to preserve the future for our progeny?
At least for me, Steve, this is a way theological dogma can have practical application in today’s world. E.g. should U.S. have pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord even if it might slightly reduce our Gross National Product?
Whether you agree with me or not, Steve, I’m glad you are giving the matter serious thought.
I appreciate the effort. Blum does appear to be fixated on 8500 BCE.
Given the sources used range from 1978 to 1993, 26 years old at least, I would expect that current sources will give a different take. In particular the temperature reconstructions for the Holocene are different. Also there has been much work on sea level changes and even the history of tropical cyclones.
It appears Tell Abu Hureyra was occupied from 9500 BCE to 7500 BCE which makes it hard to say a flood wiped out the population in 8500 BCE.
So, when do you place the flood, or are you just being argumentative? Do newer sources more accurately place the flood at 7,500 BCE, is this what you are saying? Nothing that Bloom wrote conflicts with what I see written today, it only his interpretation of the research that you might not agree with - that it was local flooding that chased away the hunters and gave the farmers a chance to thrive.