I don’t want to undermine the faith anyone has in Jesus. Sometimes, the truth can be easier to swallow, a piece at a time rather than all at once. I know people who have accepted Christ, but hold some evolutionary ideas. At the same time, evolution is one of the greatest obstacles to trusting the Bible. Therefore, I think evolution should be exposed as the deception that it is.
The Bible may not primarily be a science book, but here’s what we could expect, if it is what it claims to be. You would expect it to be written for people in various conditions, from primitive to advanced civilizations. You should find some things in the Bible that would only be properly understood by people in the context of their own time. Here and there, you should find a scientific statement that would appear to be supernatural, until a certain level of knowledge has been achieved.
That is exactly what you find in the Bible. I find it very remarkable that every argument against God is anticipated somewhere in the Bible. The global flood is one such case. Noah’s flood is a scientific ( and historical ) explanation for the geological state of the earth. One reason the evidence for Noah’s flood is overlooked, is that most investigators are thinking far too small. The geology of the earth is a jumble of details. Much attention is focused on these details; yet evolutionists lack a satisfactory explanation for the millions of cubic miles of mud and sand that formed the sedimentary layers.
Different geographical locations flooded at different times under different environmental conditions. Some flooding was by fresh water, from forty days and nights of hurricane-like rains, as the “fountains of the great deep” were “broken up.” Other flooding was by salt water as tsunamis swept over the lands. In some places, many yards of snow and ice would have formed glaciers. Geology proves all of these things have happened, but it all makes the best sense when you accept a global flood. Such a flood would have left many layers of stone, containing fossils from different areas. Each sedimentary layer is evidence of catastrophe. It took a lot of mud to cover whole herds of dinosaurs in many different parts of the world.
Secondary localized flooding is an explanation for many of the features of the earth. The global flood left huge inland seas covering much of the earth. Some of these bodies of water eventually broke through their earthen dams creating such features as the Grand Canyon. Layers of stone left by the mudflows of the global flood were exposed. Shallow lakes were left behind that evaporated leaving salt flats. The Great Salt Lake is one of these bodies of water that didn’t evaporate.
It is because of the “devil in the details” that modern geology can deliberately ignore this fact, … “the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.”
Evolution is only an obstacle if you want it to be. All the Bible says is that God created, and yet it doesn’t give the mechanism for Creation. — You may want to say that we were created from the earth, if you want to cite the creation of Adam. — Well, life coming from the earth itself is CONSISTENT with the theory of Abiogenesis.
I have already explained to you at least 3 times why the flood of Noah cannot account for the earth’s strata, and I am tired of re-iterating myself, so I am giving up since you obviously have no interest in facts.
kris,
Most of your previous objections to a global flood were answered in this post. A flood that covered the earth for a full year, and the secondary effects of that flood, would best account for the earth’s strata. It would best account for the fossils, and the “cross-cutting,” that reveals the strata. Such a flood, with it’s accompanying earthquakes, and volcanoes would have written it’s history in the stone just as we see it.
It’s plain from Simon Peter’s words that he believed in Noah’s flood, ( 1st. Peter 3:20, and 2nd. Peter 3:6 ) and he spent a lot of time with Jesus. We can see from verses such as Luke 17:26-27, that Jesus believed in Noah’s flood. Actually, he was there, and shut the door of the Ark. ( Genesis 7:16 ) You have to disregard a lot of the Bible to disbelieve in Noah’s flood, or write it off as only a ‘localized’ event.
Evolution was a huge obstacle to me. I had to begin to see where the evolutionists were making their mistakes before I could accept Jesus. I thank God for enabling me to see through the delusion of Evolution.
My objctions have not been answered at all. You have not given evidence that all of the strata could have been laid by a single event.
There is no way a single flood can explain the non-randomness of the fossil record. If the flood were resonsible for the fossil record, then the creatures in the fossil record would be non-random. . . I mentioned this before, and you have yet to adress it.
— I believe Noah’s flood happened. I just do not think it was a global event. The evidence speaks against it being a global event, and the ORIGINAL HEBREW of the story in the Bible speaks against it being a global event. . . . I even mentioned that to you before, . . . . . but you completely ignored it:
THE BIBLE ITSELF says the flood of Noah was local and not Global, . . . when you read t the original Hebrew AND NOT English translations:
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/localflood.html#KeXQ9Mr9LfwX
If you think that Evolution is a snare to your faith, then let me issue this challenge to you:
Show me a verse in the Bible that says that animals cannot evolve over a period of time. . .
The earliest layers containing fossils of one-celled organisms are from pre-Flood waters. You would then expect shallow sea-floor invertebrates to be buried in the first mudflows of the Flood. It would make sense that you would find this type of creature scattered among every fossil layer to some degree, and that is what you find. Then you would have fish, swamp plants, amphibians, and reptiles like you would find living in swamps.
Creatures that are more mobile would have headed for high ground, and wouldn’t have been buried in the mud until some of the lower hilltops were washed away. Dinosaurs were mostly lowland creatures but would have reached some of the hills. Mammals typically would have lived farther inland away from the dinosaurs.
The fossils of these creatures tend to be grouped according to their habitats. It doesn’t have to do with when they lived, but where they lived. Also remember that marine creatures are present in many layers along with land plants and animals.
It doesn’t matter whether you look at the Hebrew, or the English translations; you have to ignore much of the Bible to interpret Noah’s flood as a local event. The Bible says that only eight people survived the flood. They even had to take animals on board to save them. I know there are many websites out there that teach a local flood. They do so because their confidence in the Bible has been undermined by their faith in Science.
You say:
Then why are there modern invertebrate that live in the SAME habbitats ABSENT from these bottom layers?
Fish that are VERTEBRATES live in the same areas as the same habbitats AS THE FIRST invertebrates. . . Why don’t we find them AT THE SAME LAYERS?
Actually, Dinosaurs LIVED IN ALL places. Many of them lived in the same areas as mammals do today. — We know for a fact that many Dinosaurs lived in the same regions as the Whooly Mammoth. . . We know this because of fossil remains of Dinosaurs found in the northern most tip of Alaska in the Arctic circle. — This was where Whooly mammoths are KNOW to live, and yet we do not find Mommoths and Dinosaurs in the same strata. . . . Hmmmmmmm, I wonder why.
Many animals that LIVED in the SAME KINDS OF HABBITATS ARE NOT FOUND TOGETHER!!!! — MAny Dinosaurs lived in the same kinds of enviorments AS MANY MODERN MAMMALS!!! — Why don’t we find those modern mammals along side dinosaurs?????
Also, the most ancient invertebrate fish lived in the same habbitats as whales. . . . Why don’t we find whales in the same habbitats as trilobites, or as the invertebrate fish?? We would expect to . . . if you were correct.
Also, why don’t birds appear in the same place as flying reptiles? The had the same habbitats.
Actually it does matter. I looked up the hebrew words PERSONALLY. . . The Global flood is out of the question. It is not only illogical. It is unbiblical.
There is biblical evidence AGAINST the flood covering the whole world. . . Remember when the dove brought back an olive branch after Noah sent it out? — An olive tree could not possibly have grown so fast in only a year. . . And any pre-flood olive tree would have long died because the miture of salt and fresh water would have made the water brackish . . . which would have killed most plant life . . . including olive trees.
Science is God’s way of telling us how he did it. By undermining science, you are undermining God.
Kris,
I don’t have much time, but I can give a short answer to a couple of your comments. You could get bogged down in the details of any one layer, and write books about it. One thing that I’ve never seen from Evolutionists is a good explanation for the whole Geological Column. The explanations that are given go round and round, and never really answer anything.
“Fish that are VERTEBRATES live in the same areas AS THE FIRST invertebrates. . . Why don’t we find them AT THE SAME LAYERS?”
Fish could better evade the mud, but some would be trapped after awhile.
“we do not find Mammoths and Dinosaurs in the same strata. . . . Hmmmmmmm, I wonder why.”
The Dinosaurs were trapped by the global flood, and the Mammoths by secondary events long after the “flood.” These Dinosaurs and Mammoths are from different time periods, but not millions of years apart.
“Remember when the dove brought back an olive branch after Noah sent it out? — An olive tree could not possibly have grown so fast in only a year”
It wouldn’t have to have been a large “tree.” I don’t think the dove carried a very large branch. The King James translates the Hebrew word “Aleh,” as “leaf.”
A couple of your questions would take a little more time.
“why are there modern invertebrate that live in the SAME habitats ABSENT from these bottom layers?”
It’s my understanding that all kinds of modern invertebrates are present in the fossil layers. I would have to know what you mean specifically, before I could consider it.
I’ve got a lot of other things I want to post on the blog. I can’t put a lot of time into things that others can handle better. I think your comment about birds vs. flying reptiles is worth some study. Presently, I could only guess that the reptiles might not have been the long distance fliers that birds are. They probably wouldn’t have lived in the exact same localities.
You say:
Then why don’t MOST dinosaurs have flood sediments surrounding them? — If you were correct, then we should expect mammoths and dinosaurs in the same strata. — I thought Creationists thought that mammoths and Dinosaurs co-existed. If they did (and we know many lived in identical ecologies) they should still be fund together. They are not.
A small detail which changes nothing. My point stands. — Olive trees cannot survive a salt water, much less a mixture of salt and fresh water (which is what a flood would have produced). . . Most plan life would have died in those conditions. INCLUDING olive trees. . . . So if the flood were global, there would be NO LIVING olive tree, MUCH LESS ANY LIVING OLIVE LEAF. — So my point still stands.
Maybe I should explain it differently. — The Ediacaran Fauna (nearly from 600 million years ago) have certain animals which are now classified as invertebrates. . . And we know they are not even identical to modern invertebrates. Modern invertebrated are absent from these fauna, even the marine ones.
Actually, we know of flying reptiles that were able to fly from Africa to South America, so that is not true.
It’s my understanding that most dinosaur fossils are found in flood sediments. Evolutionary explanations have the dinosaurs buried in a sand storm, or some minor catastrophe. Then some time later, a local flood or something will cover them.
Early on, there would have been a lot of things going on besides flooding. There would have been earthquakes, and volcanoes. Asteroids are certainly a possibility. Something like that could have triggered the flood. Along with the explosions of the “Fountains of the great deep,” and the volcanoes there would have been poisonous gasses. There may even have been nuclear reactions.
I’ll have to get to some of the other things you mentioned later.
I never said NO dinosaurs are in flood deposits. However, most are not in any flood deposites at all. There are many in sediments caused by sand, and in Alaska there are several in permifrost. — Most are simply sedimentary rocks, NOT flood deposits.
The flood could have been caused by a cyclone over the Persian gulf. An astroid would have only caused a tidal wave if it his an ocean, but certainly it wouldn’t have caused it to rain.
A flood would not have caused volcanic activity. There is no mechanism for that.
Interestingly enough, “fountains of the deep” didn’t used to be understood as subterranian chanbers of water. — In the ancient middle east, that same term was used to describe irrigation cannals — AS ODD as that sound. — I was surprised when I learned that too. But I can vouce for it, being one who studies ancient history.
kris,
How were those other sediments that you mentioned turned into stone, and the dinosaur remains fossilized?
“The fountains of the great deep,” is the phrase that’s used in Genesis 7:11. All of the translations that I looked at said the same thing except the Septuagint, which uses the word “abyss,” instead of “great deep.” When you speak of the great deep, or the abyss; you’re not talking about something shallow. The supercontinent that scientists call Pangea probably began to break up when the fountains of the abyss burst forth. I think that volcanoes would have been part of that process.
The land mass that became South America was once part of Africa. That may have something to do with the flying reptiles that you were talking about being on both continents.
You ask:
Sedimentary rocks can form when the sediments are solidified by two mechanisms: Cementation and compression.
For information: http://www.stockton.edu/~epsteinc/sedrock.htm
The dinosaur bones got fossilized when external minerals replace the minerals that were originally in the bones.
Two problems:
1) Appealing to English translations as understood in English is a poor argument.
2) You completely ignored the fact that I already pointed out: — In the ancient middle east, the term “Fountains of the deep” WAS NOT used as it is today!! — AGAIN, I am a history major, and I study this stuff. IT WAS A FIGURE OF SPEECH THAT IS OUT OF USE TODAY! — AND EASILY MISUNDERSTOOD IF YOU READ THE BIBLE IN MODERN ENGLISH and without regard to ANCIENT ways of describing things.
It is a KNOWN FACT (not conjecture) that the Mesopotamians used the term “fountains of the deep” to talk about IRRIGATION CANNALS. —- “Deep” to them WAS NOT “deep” to us.
— Again, I study this stuff. I know what I am talking about.
The Bible does this all the time. — For example, the term “firstborn” has a different meaning than it does today.
The Bible itself contradicts this. It clearly says “Water gushed out.” — If volcanic eruptions were the cause, we would expect the entire surface of the earth to be filled with pillow basalts, like how basalts form on the ocean floor when lava comes into contact with sea water. — And yet these basalts are absent. Hmmmmmmmm.
That is true, but the distances given in the fossil record show that the distances they flew were still pretty far. So they were great flyers.
“Sedimentary rocks can form when the sediments are solidified by two mechanisms: Cementation and compression.”
That’s true Kris, but it takes a lot of water, or pressure to cement all those particles together. If the continents were to be covered by thick layers of mud again, we’d see more layers formed. It isn’t happening though, except in small isolated flood plains and so on. What we see overall is the weathering and breakdown of exposed rock into soil. Something very different occurred in the past, or we would not have the rock layers at all.
I’m glad you’re a history major. It is true to say that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. I know that you take the correct positions on some things, and that’s important in a time when so much history is being rewritten. First Peter 3:20 says that only the eight persons in the Ark survived the flood. Genesis 7:20-23 also makes it very plain that this was a global event. Earth’s history that is written in the rock layers verifies what the Bible says.
I have read that there is pillow lava on Mt. Ararat, at thirteen thousand feet. It’s going to be interesting to see whether the Chinese and Turkish explorers have really found Noah’s Ark on Ararat, or just some other old wooden structure. I hope and pray Turkey allows them to excavate the site..
You say:
That’s true Kris, but it takes a lot of water, or pressure to cement all those particles together.
You left out one major component: Time. The process doesn’t happen quickly.
I’ve told you a million times . . . . even a global flood would leave a SINGLE layer of mudstone. The multilayers are not what we would expect from a global flood.
You have just exposed your ignorance of geologic processes. It is true that there is whethring and erosion, but the processes that have made those rocks again are still making making rocks NOW, this very moment. They teach this is Geology 1. Don’t tell me you don’t know about that.
Also, you have to remember, NOT EVERYTHING gets eroded or broken down. So there is nothing to stop new layers from staking on top of eachother.
That vers says eight people survived in the ark “from the waters” — It doesn’t say only eight people were alive after the flood. If the flood were local, this could still be true. So there is no contradiction here.
Actually, no it doesn’t. — The word for “mountains” in hebrew that is used in that passage is “HAR.” — “Har” can be easily translated as “hills” or “hill country.”
I already deal with all the so-called “biblical” proof for a global flood here:
kris,
I want to get back to this subject a little later. I’ve mentioned that I’m not at all satisfied with the Evolutionists half-way explanation for the Geological Column. I’d like to be able to explain ‘why’ I say that. I’ve got to work on it.
-Sighs-
The geological collumn is NOT part of Evolution. It has NOTHING to do with Evolution. The geological collumn was explained by Creationists. — It is well explained by natural process we see today.
— Never mind. You obviously wouldn’t admit you were wrong about geology even if it you were shown it before your eyes. I give up. — I’ll go talk to a wall.