ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Is Noah Flood Valid

Is Noah's Flood and Ark a valid theory?

Moderator - Yes, just view the fossil records across the planet.

Join Our Christian Friendship and Take The Christian Living Quiz
 ---atheist on 2/28/12
     Helpful Blog Vote (7)

Post a New Blog



wARWICK,

sORRY...i FORGOT THAT SNELLING IS YOUR GOD. sO ACTUALLY i AM GUILTY OF BLASPHEMY.

Ad hominem attacks involve belittling one to attack their claims but can also involve pointing out true character flaws or actions that are irrelevant to the opponent's argument.

What I observed was not irrelevant. I was there, you were not. If he is a scientist, the word has no meaning.
---atheist on 3/9/12


Atheist over the time you have blogged here you have shown little grasp of science and even less of what the Bible says. That you feel the need to make ad hominem comments about Dr Andrew Snelling shows you have nothing rational to say. I imagine you don't like him because he is a qualified scientist who contradicts your beliefs.How dare he do so, amd pompously at that!
---Warwick on 3/9/12


Cluny I have had communion in RC churches and noticed the wine did not become blood, nor did the 'bread' become flesh. If it did then those partaking would be cannibals.
---Warwick on 3/9/12


Warwick,

I only saw Snelling once when he visited my country recently. I found him to be pompous, lacking in any true scientific rigor, but willing to fulminate any narrative he needed to create to support his positions.

Marc,

Of course you disagree with the article. It contains facts disagreeable to your position.
---atheist on 3/9/12


\\No blood or meat there. The very idea of transubstantiation is akin to canniblaism. \\

That's because the Eucharistic Body and Blood of Christ don't exist in Protestant churches.

As I said elsewhere, transubstantiation is an effort to EXPLAIN the nature of he change--an explanation that Orthodoxy does no commit herself to.

Nice to know you are of one mind with the Roman Pagans and the PuffHo on this issue. They spread the same slander.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/9/12




Atheist,

Correct me if I am wrong, but I notice the Wiki article on Polystrate Fossils doesn't give one example of radiometric dating for the strata or carbon dating for the fossils. So how does the writer know that that strata were laid down very quickly i.e. the strata would all be roughly the same age?

There are many examples of the layers around a polystrate fossil which give hugely varying radiometric dates.

But you really aren't interested in disagreeable facts are you, atheist!
---Marc on 3/9/12


Atheist it is an interesting fact that trees in sedimemtary rock are vertical and have neither roots, branches or leaves. The evidence is that they were deposited rapidly (otherwise they would rot) under deep layers of sedimentary rock which has preserved them. Recent events (e.g. Mt St Helens) have shown that trees transported in such catastrophic events have their roots and branches ripped off and when waterlogged float upright until they sink into the sediment below. This contradicts the long-ages story. Ask the geologist Dr Andrew Snelling.
---Warwick on 3/9/12


That would be quite a longterm worldwide conspiracy---and to what purpose?---atheist on 3/8/12

God created man to seek for the truth, and if a man does not believe in God, they will seek for the truth somewhere else.
What one common trait do we find in those who believe in the science of evolution?
They don't believe in God.
---David on 3/9/12


Warwick:

I was not suggesting Jesus was evasive - I was merely saying that IF ONE USES THE ARGUMENT YOU YOURSELF USED, one would conclude Jesus himself was evasive.

This is called reductio ad absurdum.

If you accuse me of being evasive here, you must logically also accuse Jesus of being evasive for the same reason. But I presume from your last comment that you would not presume to do that. So why do you accuse me of it?
---StrongAxe on 3/9/12


Atheist,

Yes, that's right, it's that MISSING something which needed to be there, but wasn't, in order for your tale to be ended. That's why evolutionary explanations are just so stories, as in It's not too difficult to imagine a cliff collapsing (or a trillion zillion information-adding mutations to appear de novo) and we have fossils.

You write an assortment of creatures from ALL AGES. Atheist, that's a great example of question begging. That's the thing we are arguing about: whether or not all those diverse creatures are from the same age or vastly different ones. You've just snuck that in as though it's a given. See how your ideology bends your words.
---Marc on 3/8/12




"In the sedimentary records they use to determine time, they have also found tree's standing vertical in that same sediment. Evidence that has been suppressed, because it goes against their theory.
These tree's would have had to have lived millions of years to have been in all these sedimentary layers."---David

That would be quite a longterm worldwide conspiracy---and to what purpose?

Go to wikipedia and search for "Polystrate fossil". It is not an issue.
---atheist on 3/8/12


Cluny I have been to a few different denominations for communion and have noticed the wine was still wine (or fruit juice!) and the bread was still bread. No blood or meat there. The very idea of transubstantiation is akin to canniblaism.

Therefore on the grounds that the wine remains wine and the bread remains bread and eating human flesh is cannibalism, transubstantiation is to be rejected. If someone wants to imagine that in some spiritual way this occurs then there may be something to this.

From my reading transubstantiation was unknown to the apostles. And most likely introduced into RC practices by Anastatius, a friar in c637AD.

---Warwick on 3/8/12


Atheist by doubting sorting occurs when sediment is conveyed in running water you show you know nothing of geology. All you need to do is visit a cliff face where depths of sedimentary rock are exposed and there you will find sorting.

As I pointed our at Fossil Bluff in Tasmania fossils of marine and land-dwelling creatures are found together. I have noticed they don't live together so being buried in depths of sedimentary rock they must have ended up together by the action floodwaters.

As I have pointed out the US Grand Canyon with its c1.6 km depth of sedimentary rock contradicts the evolutionary long-ages belief and is consistent with flood geology. Ask Dr Andrew Snelling. Say hello for me, I haven't seen him for a while.
---Warwick on 3/8/12


It really doesn't back up anything. I have been to a beach where I have seen such things, the little ones wit the big ones, a dead fish, seagull, opossum, etc.

The only thing missing would be a collapse of the cliff overhead and the process could begin.

But, if YEC is right, then there should be beds with an assortment of creatures from all ages mixed together.

Your sorting story is silly Warwick, and you know it.
---atheist on 3/8/12


Warwick, as long as you deny the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ, you are in NO POSITION to call ANYONE a "Biblio-sceptic."

I'm not a Biblio-sceptic, btw. I'm a Warwick-interpretation-of-the-Bible-sceptic.

While you might conflate them, the two are NOT the same.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/8/12


Atheist,

You mention that Snelling showed you a fossil deposit of sea creatures and land animals. So how does such an example back up the evolutionary long age explanation?

BTW, you STILL haven't explained why a creationist view necessarily should have fossils of trilobites and man together. You made the claim, you explain your argument.
---Marc on 3/8/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Bankruptcy


StrongAxe, the difference is that Jesus is the Truth and therefore by definition was not trying to evade the truth. He answered them with a question they would not answer as their answer would condemn them either way. He discerned their evil hearts and purposes. See Matthew 23:13-33.

That you would suggest the Lord is evasive and without conviction condemns you.
---Warwick on 3/8/12


Atheist
I was appealing to your logic. I don't trust the Scientific facts of a Scientist who doesn't believe in God. Because their bias, may also bias their evidence.
They only report on the evidence which supports their beliefs, and tend to suppress the evidence which goes against those beliefs.

In the sedimentary records they use to determine time, they have also found tree's standing vertical in that same sediment. Evidence that has been suppressed, because it goes against their theory.
These tree's would have had to have lived millions of years to have been in all these sedimentary layers.

It's natural for men to suppress facts which may go against their beliefs.
---David on 3/8/12


Warwick: It is clear that Cluny and Mr. Axe will never admit that the Bible is right and they are wrong, but will always hold their own opinions, and those of their esteemed academicians in the highest regard. Try as we might to have a logical, straightforward discussion with them, in the end all we ever get is circumlocution and obfuscation. It is indeed frustrating.


---jerry6593 on 3/8/12


Warwick:

Remember when Jesus was being asked questions by the pharisees and by Pilate, not to gain information, but rather to trap him? He was also evasive - he said "neither will I tell you whence my authority comes from". Does this mean Jesus was also a man without conviction?
---StrongAxe on 3/7/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Cash Advance


Cluny I am not surprized your answer is evasive. You are not a man of conviction are you!

BTW 'universal' when applied to the flood means global.

As has been shown here many times Scripture says the flood covered the whole globe.

The idea that God brought animals (including birds) to a locality which was to be flooded, to save them, is ludicrous. Birds were well able to fly away from any local flood, as the waters rose. Just as ludicrous is the idea the flood could rise above all the mountains (in a locality as you say) and not immediately flow away! What kept it suspended above the mountains?

Only BiblioSceptics propose such antiScriptural nonsense.
---Warwick on 3/7/12


\\Cluny, cease with the equivocation and state whether you do or do not accept that the flood of Noah was universal.
---Warwick on 3/6/12\\

I don't have to answer your ultimata, Warwick. You may not like my reply.

It certainly seems to have killed human beings, with the exception of Noah's family.

Whether it was global (by its nature it could not be universal) or merely located where humans were living at the time, the effect was the same.

FWIW, geneticists have found a "genetic bottleneck" in human DNA. Forgive me, I don't know the proper words to describe this.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/7/12


A theist: You seem to have convinced yourself that the fossil record does indeed prove Noah's Flood. -Jervy

What? I am only following a faulty line of reason present to me by Andrew Snelling, when he showed a fossil bed that contain fish, shellfish, and land dwelling animals. He claim was only The Flood could produce such a thing.

Why are similar and extinct organisms only found at the same layers in the geologic column?
---atheist on 3/7/12


A theist: You seem to have convinced yourself that the fossil record does indeed prove Noah's Flood. As for why all fossil types aren't found together, I've already answered that. Animals were buried where they lived (and with whom they lived) unless they were able to run for their lives.


---jerry6593 on 3/7/12


Shop For Christian Loans


Cluny, cease with the equivocation and state whether you do or do not accept that the flood of Noah was universal.
---Warwick on 3/6/12


Wiki: "Fossilization is an exceptionally rare occurrence, because most components of formerly living things tend to decompose relatively quickly following death. In order for an organism to be fossilized, the remains normally need to be covered by sediment as soon as possible. However there are exceptions to this, such as if an organism becomes frozen, desiccated, or comes to rest in an anoxic (oxygen-free) environment. There are several different types of fossils and fossilization processes."

Marc, why wouldn't all species be found together.
---atheist on 3/6/12


\\Now you do not believe Noah's flood was universal\\

I never said I didn't.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/6/12


For the second time, Atheist,

You reason if trilobites and humans lived together, as according to creationists, then we should necessarily find fossils of them together. How do you conclude that?
---Marc on 3/6/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Counseling


StrongAxe, I believe we cannot say creationists do or do not believe a,b,c or d, because like all people they have many beliefs. However after long-term experience I have never heard an educated creationist say they do not believe in speciation. Most educated creationists do not believe that micro evolution has anything to do with macro evoultion. Micro evolution being changes within a kind or species which lead nowhere evolutionary wise. Macro evolution being the belief that one kind of creature has changed into a totally different kind. For examole dinosaus into bird.
---Warwick on 3/6/12


Warwick:

There are often too many questions to answer in 150 words, and multiple messages are forbidden. Also, sometimes answers require research, and I avoid "open mouth now, insert foot later".

I got the idea many creationists deny speciation from hearing some creationists speak, and from seeing some web sites. However, after you asked the question, I looked for that specific question on some creationist sites, and you are right. At best, "no speciation" is relegated under "arguments to never use", perhaps because they were once popular, but have since been discredited, so creationists no longer promote them or take them seriously.
---StrongAxe on 3/5/12


Atheist, David may be pointing out that real world fossils cannot form as described in the evolutionary fable.

Do an experiment, kill 2 rats and leave 1 lying around to be slowly covered by sediment. Bury the 2nd. In a month, in both cases you will have a rotten mess, with little left. Now investigate fossil beds. You will see the fossils were covered in sediment, like cement, preserving the creatures from oxygen, and predators. Consider the great depths of sediment in these fossil beds remembering all fossils therein had to be buried very rapidly, in some cases necessarily within minutes. This reality doesn't fit with the evolutionary fable. But the massive fossil beds do match up with the processes unleashed by the Noarchian deluge.
---Warwick on 3/5/12


""where do you get the idea that creation believing Christians do not accept speciation as fact? The many I know, scientist and lay certainly do not believe this."

I can't make sense of what you position is, perhaps Strongeaxe can't either.

Do Christians accept speciation as fact?

Should it be decent from kinda-ation?
---atheist on 3/5/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Relief


David,

Try "fossils" on wikipedia...
---atheist on 3/5/12


StrongAxe if you read through what I have written, and think carefully about it I am confident you will understand.

The older long-ages belief regarding the Grand Canyon was slow and gradual/millions of years. When some geologists studied each of the massive layers (e.g. Coconino sandstone,Hermit Shale) they became convinced each was deposited rapidly under deep fast-flowing water so decided the long-ages must have been between the different layers. However there cannot have been millions of years between the deposition of each layer because of the lack of erosion at each surface. The evidence then points to all the layers being deposited rapidly, over a short time-span. This fits within the one year Noarchian deluge time-frame.
---Warwick on 3/5/12


StrongAxe, I have asked you the following question a few times : "where do you get the idea that creation believing Christians do not accept speciation as fact? The many I know, scientist and lay certainly do not believe this."

That you have not answered suggests to me your belief was a prejudice, not based upon fact.
---Warwick on 3/5/12


Warwick:

If each layer were formed by a "Noachian deluge", why are there so many distinct layers, and only one Flood?
---StrongAxe on 3/5/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Settlement


StrongAxe, where do you get the idea that creation believing Christians do not accept speciation as fact? The many I know, scientist and lay certainly do not believe this.
---Warwick on 3/4/12


Atheist
When an animal dies on the side of a road, does it become a fossil?
If you buried an animal or a person in the ground, do they become a fossils?
Once an animal dies decomposition begins, and that prevents it from becoming a fossil, even if it were to become buried.

Christians use the flood to explain the fossil record, and it is a scientifically valid explanation, because simple logic tells us these animals had to be alive and encapulated to form a fossil.

Since you do not accept the flood story, I'm curious as to what your scientific theory is, as to how these fossils were created?
---David on 3/5/12


StrongAxe you wrote "Fossil layers do not occur by gradual slow deposition of sediments." Isn't that what I have always said? What was your point in telling me this?
---Warwick on 3/4/12


StrongAxe, regarding sedimentary layers and fossils consider the Grand Canyon where c 1.6km of sedimentary rock is exposed. Evolutionists once believed this formed by slow deposition over millions of years. However the obvious eventually hit home-the evidence shows each massive layer was formed rapidly under deep fast-flowing water. So where are the evolutionary millions of years? Must be between each layer. So each layer formed quickly then sat for millions of years before the next "catastrophe." Then there should be evidence of large-scale erosion but there isn't! Each layer is deposited flat on the flat one below. This fits with the Noarchian deluge but not with any version of the long-ages story.
---Warwick on 3/4/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Distance Learning


Atheist,

You reason if trilobites and humans lived together, as according to creationists, then we should necessarily find fossils of them together. How do you conclude that?
---Marc on 3/4/12


If the penalty for unbelief was not so severe the energy Atheist burns trying to disprove God would be a joke.
All of it in a vain attempt to deny OTHERS meaning. Huh?
If we're all here by chance, without intelligent design, meaning or purpose why expend ones four scores arguing about it. Take comfort in your own belief that you are no more significant than a rock or leaf.
---larry on 3/4/12


Warwick:

Fossil layers do not occur by gradual slow deposition of sediments. Each set of fossils forms in a rare catastrophe (which is why there are so few of them). However, each catastrophe deposits new layers of sediment on previous ones.

You see similar things in archaeology. Sometimes, one will find a city underneath another, and more than one. Cities don't slowly build up dirt one inch as a time. The are living and inhabited for a while, then they are abandoned - then they get covered over with dirt, and much later, the same conditions that made it favorable to build a city there before, likely makes it favorable to build another city in the same place later.
---StrongAxe on 3/4/12


A theist: By now you know that Guadaloupe woman was incased in solid limestone with other "ancient" fossils. That should have answered your original question. Your responses about Mt. St. Helens proves our contention that catastrophism (i.e., a flood) caused the fossil layers - not the lyellian gradualism espoused by Darwin. And no, there are no fossils being created 20 ft. below my house. Well drilling samples have proved that. Do you actually believe that fossils are being formed underground today?


---jerry6593 on 3/4/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Education


Atheist if you study sedimentary rock you will see particles are sorted into different sizes by the flowing action of water. The action which causes this can be seen in flume experiments. Sorting is a demonstrable fact.

The fossil record does not exist anywhere as shown in evolutionary text books. Sometimes they are in A upon B upon C upon D order, or D,A,C,B, etc.

Fossilization only occurs when creatures are rapidly covered in sediment therefore protected from scavenging or rotting. In Western Australia there are jelly fish fossils and jelly fish fall apart in a very short time, if not covered. Therefore the evolutionary slow and gradual deposition and fossilization does not occur.
---Warwick on 3/3/12


cluny, sorry but the archeologist said since so many were in the same place as if to hover together suggest a flood. You continue to be dumb...educated but dumb.
yes they were mamouths
---shira4368 on 3/3/12


Jeryy,

"Guadaloupe Woman" was never claimed to be 25 million years old except by Cooper.

Can you prove a claim that fossils are not being formed some place on earth? Like Mt. St. Helens? Or twenty feet under your house.

Any animal carcass? Really? Volcano with poisonous gas kills everything, then the magma melts snow causing a big mudslide.

Uplift. You know the way mountains are formed.

Shouldnt there be at least the remains of a few humans, a campfire, stone tools, bones from dinosaur steak and trilobite stew. Yum
---atheist on 3/3/12


Warwick,

Sorting---like the trilobites go here, the dinosaur go there, and the humans go at the top....

Saw Snelling in person,..."and the only way this could happen is with a catastrophic event like the flood..."
---atheist on 3/3/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Equity Loans


A theist: "Come on. You must have some support for your hypothesis." I do indeed. It's called the fossil record. Can you point to a single place on earth today where fossils beds are being formed? Do you deny that scavengers dismember, eat and scatter any animal carcass on dry land or on the sea floor? Why are there marine fossils on mountain tops?

"Why no people, etc. in fossil layers?" There are some, but considering the massive sedimentation and the small population, they are rare. Research "Guadaloupe Woman".

---jerry6593 on 3/3/12


Cluny, you wrote "Many cultures have stories of a wide-spread, if not universal flood, even some American Indian tribes."

Now you do not believe Noah's flood was universal, so I asked: "if the flood was not universal why would American indians have flood stories? Australian aboriginals also have such stories. Why?"

I believe it is a fair question.
---Warwick on 3/2/12


Atheist the evidence is that fossils do not form in the way evolutionists promote (gradually over time) but are formed when creatures are encapsulated within sediment deposited by deep fast flowing water. As anyone who has done even a little study knows such processes involve sorting but none the less there are fossil beds (e.g. Fossil Bluff in Tasmania) where creatures as diverse as whales and possums are found in the same sedimentary rock.

One fossil that evolutionists have long promoted as the link between dinosaurs and birds (see Archaeo National Geographic magazine, November 1999, p. 105) is now known to be a fraud, a concoction of 5 different specimens and every detail of the NG drawing was false!
---Warwick on 3/2/12


\\a couple of years ago I visited an archeological site in waco texas. hunters had found some giant bones of an elephant\\

The modern elephant is NOT native to North America.

Did you mean a mammoth or a mastodon, which were native to this continent?

"A flood" is not the same thing as "the flood."

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/2/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Interest Rates


Warwick, here is the debated sentcence from my original post. Make of it what you will.

>>Many cultures have stories of a wide-spread, if not universal flood, even some American Indian tribes.<<

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/2/12


Jerry,

Come on. You must have some support for your hypothesis.

Anyway, why don't we find cities, people, their tools and pottery, dinosaurs, trilobites, ancient fishes, extinct giant salamanders buried together?
---atheist on 3/2/12


A theist: Indeed, I could go on and on, but alas, the 125-word limit... Let's try a more basic approach. Does the fossil record support darwinistic gradualism of fossil formation on exposed land surfaces over millions of years or near-instant water-borne sediment burial? If you study the fossil layers and apply a little common sense (Like scavengers eat any exposed carcasses.), you'll have your answer.


---jerry6593 on 3/2/12


a couple of years ago I visited an archeological site in waco texas. hunters had found some giant bones of an elephant. A building had been built around the site with a cat walk so visitors could see down at the dig. They uncovered approx 12 elephants that were 15-18 feet high. Authorities said since so many were found in one place it had to be a flood that killed them. you make the judgement on this one. I believe the bible when it says God flooded the world.
---shira4368 on 3/2/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Marketing


Floods happen.

Relative to how far one can see, a large flood may appear worldwide, especially for people who never travel more than a few miles from home.

Before, other explanations, using better understood natural events (rain, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc., supernatural causes were attributed to the actions of god or gods told in stories.

The stories were passed by word of mouth and traveled as people traveled.

Delaware Indians say a few people survived on the back of a big turtle. What's the point? Genesis is a story too...
---atheist on 3/1/12


Cluny, stop being evasive and answer my question. "if the flood was not universal why would American indians have flood stories? Australian aboriginals also have such stories. Why?"

If you cannot give a proper answer just admit it!
---Warwick on 3/1/12


So Jerry, you have rudimentary hypothesis: plant and animals found fossilized in the geological column will be found in an order based on their ability to flee and survive the rising waters of the flood. Given the intensity of the efforts accredited non-secular YEC scientists, there must be mountains of evidence demonstrating this. Please go on...
---atheist on 3/1/12


Warwick, Scott1 said the same thing that I did.

Why didn't you impale him with your question?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 3/1/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Life Insurance


Cluny, yes I did read what you wrote, and asked my question based upon what you wrote. But you have evaded answering.
---Warwick on 2/29/12


Atheist a look at the fossil beds shows that masses of marine and land-dwelling animals are buried together. Just as you would expect from such a catastrophic world-wide flood. On the coast of Tasmania possums and whales are buried together in the fossil record.

Obviously not all the fish perished.
---Warwick on 2/29/12


The Moderator is right. The fossil record PROVES the universal flood of Noah, in every detail. The sorting of animal types in layers follows the animal's ability to flee the rising waters (eg, men and monkeys can run and climb trees). The sorting of gravel within each layer follows the coarse-to-fine sorting associated with underwater turbidite action. Fossils are only formed by rapid burial - not the slow, gradualism proposed by Darwin.


---jerry6593 on 3/1/12


Were the American Indians and aborigines on Noah's ark. the would have had to be if the story got passed down, otherwise they would have all be down.
---atheist on 2/29/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Make Money


If the flood were worldwide then wouldn't the be just piles and piles of fossils of all types, including humans, dinosaurs, giant flees and insect, worldwide at the same place in the geological colums? where are these fossiles. How come all the fish died?
---atheist on 2/29/12


\\Cluny if the flood was not universal why would American indians have flood stories? Australian aboriginals also have such stories. Why?
---Warwick on 2/29/12\\

Warwick, did you actually read my words, or are you merely reacting to them?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/29/12


That floods occur universally is true, that there was a universal flood has not been proven. The marine fossils in mountains were in seas or lakes millions of years ago before the mountains were formed. The bible is not history, although it may have history in it.
---atheist on 2/29/12


to quote another:
Billions of dead things buried in rock layers layed down by water all over the world.
---micha9334 on 2/29/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments


"Jesus is now GOD"

Say what? NOW? "All things were made by Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made." John 1:3 - If Scripture declares "All things were made by Him", how's He "now God? Wasn't He God before He came in the flesh?

""scripture" IS NOT "GOD"

And again, say what? Another name for the Holy Bible is The Word of God, which happens to be Jesus Christ, who's God. The OT concealed the NT and the NT revealed the concealment of the OT, which is Jesus Christ. "It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."
---christan on 2/29/12


Cluny if the flood was not universal why would American indians have flood stories? Australian aboriginals also have such stories. Why?
---Warwick on 2/29/12


Whether a person is willing to believe the flood, Eden's Garden Snake, or any other one of God's spiritual expressions in scripture to be literal (Jesus occasionally spoke in "FIGURES" of speech) is unimportant, it has absolutely NO BEARING on "Christ and Him crucified" (the "DOCTRINE of CHRIST").

It is actually an offense against Jesus to encourage people to believe that these 'tertiary/secondary beliefs' matter. "Christ and Him crucified" is ALL THAT MATTERS (Jesus is now GOD,.. God in COMPLETION, NOT "scripture",.."scripture" IS NOT "GOD")...for the believer of GOSPEL TRUTH, NOTHING else matters.

"I have said this to you in figures" John 16:25.
---more_excellent_way on 2/29/12


Atheist, your question is invalid. The world-wide flood of Noah is not presented in Scripture as a 'theory' but as historical reality.

You are not required to accept the Bible as truth but you should refrain from the attempt to rewrite it.
---Warwick on 2/28/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks


The worldwide deluge is not a theory, but a documented histroical fact recorded in the holy scriptures, and also verified with archeological evidence of marine fossils found on the highest apexes of some of the tallest mountains.
---Eloy on 2/28/12


What do you mean by this question, atheist?

There is record of a wide-spread flood in the middle east.

Many cultures have stories of a wide-spread, if not universal flood, even some American Indian tribes.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 2/28/12


yes every ancient civilization on earth has a massive flood story with one person saving the animals. I believe (cannot prove) that the flood happened then stories changed (names, places, events in stories) as people spread out over the earth. This is a part of faith in the Bible.
---Scott1 on 2/28/12


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.