The correctness of your claims is dependent on how the Bible is understood. Those who approach it as you do and likewise ignore all evidence to the contrary may agree with you, but no one else should.
1 Like
To recover from a global flood there would have to be a whole lot more than just “land vertebrate” on board.
As a mental exercise just try to imagine the types of life that were not on board.
Not sure what the “need” has to do with it. Noah was obeying God, just as Abraham was when he almost sacrificed Isaac. 1 Peter 3 refers to the flood as a symbol for baptism, so perhaps God had more in mind than just allowing Noah to live…
Well, we have had flash floods around here, and lots of people get stranded even knowing it may be coming, so a boat might come in handy. Of course, God could have wiped out earth and put Noah down in a new creation with a word, but he chose not to do so, which also supports that the story is not just a story.
1 Like
Back to the title question, here is an article in the ASA journal which dates it to 5700 BC:
He also has some interesting thoughts on the construction of the ark that Ken Ham may not agree with.
1 Like
Genesis 9:19 These three were the sons of Noah; and from these the whole earth was peopled.
Hence all other males were destroyed in the flood.
But do they need a boat 450’ long?
Indeed it would. We are not told what happened regarding other creatures and plants.
Convenient, but it would require a second creation to repopulate the planet. This would eliminate the need to have animals on board so why have Noah save just some of the life on the planet?
It would require a small remnant to survive the flood by various means. One possibility is rafting on debris mats. Insects wouldn’t require a large raft. Evolutionists have no problem with rafting when it suits their narrative. There might have been other means; we simply aren’t told. There’s no need to jump straight to a second creation.
Insects, btw, don’t have breath in their nostrils because they don’t have nostrils. They breath through pores in their exoskeleton.
No it would require a massive remnant to repopulate the entire planet.
I believe this is called a saving device, but that doesn’t work. You have plants that only reproduce from seeds. You have insects that only live in the soil. You have vast numbers of fresh water life forms. You have entire ecosystems that would collapse if everything is not in balance and you think floating mats are going to solve the problem?
@Bill_II, as I told @Fares “you should go to a YEC site such as CMI; and not to ask questions but to read the answers. Surprisingly YEC’s are aware of these issues and have answered them.”
As a starter try this one.
I have seen these arguments before. Remember the best lie has a nugget of truth in it.
Examples of things that are hand waved away:
Problem being there are many species that do not survive when in water of the wrong salinity. So it doesn’t matter how salty the sea was before the flood. The flood would have killed off whatever species didn’t like the flood salinity level.
But not ALL species are able to tolerate wide changes in salinity.
Sure but what about the species that don’t?
Differences might be minor but ask anyone who has kept an aquarium how well fresh water fish survive in a marine tank. Answer, they don’t.
Nice hand wave. But this is supposed to be a chaotic world wide flood that is ripping up mountains to created thousands of feet of sediment and yet there are calm regions where the water doesn’t mix? And then magically at the end of the flood the fresh water layers were deposited into lakes and streams all over the planet.
Again, not all.
I have seen the “nugget of truth” dodge used time and again in YEC literature. I’m sorry but the problems with a global flood are legion and the only way to believe in it is to ignore what God has shown us in His creation and replace God’s word with our own.
3 Likes
No, they haven’t not in any way, not even close.
You present assertions based on your world view. For instance, you fail to note that the oldest world map from 6th century BCE Babylon shows a single flat circular continent bounded by a river ocean. That continent only goes to the mountains of Armenia. Clearly, the world concept in the ANE did not encompass all of the continents and the global nature of the modern planet. You assume today’s geographic knowledge existed in antiquity - an error called presentism. Note the lack of convincing evidence makes you subject to Hitchen’s Razor - what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Cheers.
Interesting but irrelevant. Maps can only show what is known to the map maker with imagination used to fill in beyond that. (here be dragons). No European maps prior to the 15th century showed America. There is no need then or earlier to assume today’s geographic knowledge.
Which falls victim to itself.
You failed to see my point - that the ancient view of the world was one that was so limited in extent that it occupied only a small region of the actual world we know. Thus, a world flood to them need only be one which we would consider of regional extent. So the Babylonian map is indeed of significance since it clearly shows the extent of their known world. The Greeks also had a very similar view of the world as a flat circular continent surrounded by Okeanos and limited to lands known to them.
But it didn’t matter what Noah or anyone else thought. It was God who said “I am going to bring a flood of waters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die.” [NRSV]
For the reasons I have given above the local flood theory just doesn’t work.
(And Noah looked out the window of the Ark and saw the hills and mountains surrounding the valley, and the tops of the trees above the flood water. Then Noah cursed God saying, “Why did I spend all those years building this massive Ark? Why have I been cooped up for 3 months with thousands of smelly animals? A couple of days walk would have got us all to high ground and safe from this local flood. And now you tell me we’ll be here for another 10 months!”)
1 Like
I’m not sure how much sense the “There is a much more practical way that God could have accomplished this task” response is going to work when you consider Abraham and Isaac… Gideon… Joshua and the battle of Jericho… Balaam… Adam and Eve with a forbidden tree at their fingertips… Jonah… maybe even the entire Bible. 
The lesson of the Flood is a beautiful symbol of the arrogance of man being leveled by Natural catastrophe. Because man has perhaps a unique capacity for abstraction we have the danger of becoming detached from our organic relationship to creation. This detachment is being played out with our current contempt for our environment. Trying to date the flood is a distraction from it’s true message and our present crisis.
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.