Noah's Flood, Real or No Real

Nothing simpler. For a start, we would expect to find:

* A global uniform sediment layer
* Global uniform flood deposits
* Uniform fossil layers, deposited globally, and at the same time
* A geological record indicative of a global flood
* Evidence of a massive species bottleneck in all oxygen breathing animal populations on the earth, as well as in the human population
* Evidence of species distribution and diversity indicative of a global flood
* Evidence of all civilizations on the earth at that time being simultaneously destroyed by a flood, leaving massive archaeological evidence for the fact

We would not expect to find:

* This evidence contrary to a global flood
* A geological record which contradicts a global flood
* A species record with no discernible chronologically and geographically uniform bottleneck
* Species distribution and diversity incompatible with a global flood
* Evidence of civilizations on the earth at the time of the flood which were entirely unaffected by the flood and which left no record of it

8 comments:

  1. Agreed. This is why I tend to believe in a localized Mesopotamian flood, the "known" world to the writers of the Bible.

    There are sediment layers in specific areas, like Sumeria. Of course, they have their Gilgamesh as part of their tradition.

    It would be interesting, though, to find Nephalim skeletons as part of the fossil records. There is much going on theopolitically in the Middle East, making widespread excavation impossible at this time. Obviously, in the Muslim controlled lands which still compose a large portion of the holy lands, there is vested interest in keeping a lid on anything which would tend to invalidate the Muslim faith.

    I do not believe that all of the evidence that is there potentially has been yet unearthed and considered. New technology has just placed us on the ground floor for discovery. The Dead Sea Scrolls were just huge in terms of impact on our understanding of ancient manuscripts, and that discovery only dates from the late 1940s, with analysis having taken place during the '50s and '60s. You get some discoveries which tend to support the Bible, and some which seem to conflict, but there is most certainly an abundance of discovery left to come.

    Anyone who makes definitive statements extrapolating from what we now know, usually has either a religious or atheist agenda, rather than seeking to understand. I believe we all (especially former Armstrongites) tend to try to prove things to ourselves, and end up presenting them to others in search of validation. That seems to be part of the human modus operandi. I guess that is why we speak of faith. Atheists often have a level of faith which would shame most Christians.

    BB

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Anyone who makes definitive statements extrapolating from what we now know, usually has either a religious or atheist agenda, rather than seeking to understand."

    I became an atheist as a direct result of seeking to understand.


    Paul Ray

    ReplyDelete
  3. Byker Bob said...
    Agreed. This is why I tend to believe in a localized Mesopotamian flood, the "known" world to the writers of the Bible.

    Yes, and the evidence shows that the big flood in Mesopotamia was about 6,000 years before Noah's time at the end of the last ice age.

    Could it be that the flood story is merely an allegory about the covenant between God and Noah (from Noah to Abraham to Israel)?

    Noah wasn't commanded to build a boat or ship but an "ark", like in, "ark of the covenant" - that is, a box.

    It would be interesting, though, to find Nephalim skeletons as part of the fossil records.

    The "giants" in the earth properly means "tyrants" according to Strongs. IOW, the city-state Priest/Kings of ancient times who were more or less worshipped as gods. Nimrod was one of those and is mentioned after the flood.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's just too difficult for most funadamentalists and literalists to wrap their minds around the mythology of the Garden of Eden story, the flood and probably the Exodus, David and Solomon's glorius reign and Paul's idea of the Cosmic Jesus unrelated to anything in the Gospels.

    Making scriptures mean what they never meant has been raised to an art form by literalists. This was never the intention and somewhere along the way, the intent of the stories was lost in the shuffle.

    Funny how the Creationist Museum is built on layer after coherent layer of lower life fossils in just the order you would expect to find them. It's a museum dedicated to ignorance.

    Read, "Your Inner Fish" by Shubin

    ReplyDelete
  5. There will be Corkies in the last days, probably led by the Corky of the power of the air who is sad because he cannot ascend to the heavens and be the most high. When its all said and done, will you have staked your claim on Corky and his father, the father of all lies? Have we gotten to the root of the matter?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Corky-

    Long time no contact. Glad to see you are still in there stirring the the pot and afflicting those who consider themselves secure.

    I noted one reader who dragged out the old canard about atheism requiring faith; even faith that would shame many believers. That is clearly a statement borne of unfamiliarity with atheist thought which is standard fare among exWCG folks. It is not only old hat but silly in it's attempt to make a religion out of atheism. It is to actually say that faith is foolish and atheists can go the believer one better in such a pursuit.

    Anyways, just how much faith does it require of the atheist to lack belief in gods the believer can neither describe nor prove? Why, indeed, should the atheist even care?

    Keep up the good work.

    JB

    PS--Good observation Paul Ray. That is exactly what I did.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hoo-wee! This is just so good. I'm remembering what it did to my own mind while I was an atheist and some of the Christians told me I had so much faith. Heh heh heh.

    BB

    ReplyDelete
  8. Usually BB is pretty clear in his comments. This time he is rather obtuse inviting further discussion, I guess. Since this is a blog, I'll proceed.

    "I'm remembering what it did to my own mind while I was an atheist..."

    In the past, just what was done to your mind by not believing in any gods which is atheism?

    Aside from the ignorant remark of the Christians, what brought you now to the dark side of having theistic belief?

    JB

    ReplyDelete

Please be nice when writing comments. Thank you.