Freethought & Rationalism Archive

rhutchin · 01-06-2010, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Most people see Noah's food as a picture of the judgment at the end of the world. Peter even referred to it in this way. So, it could be an historical parable. I have no problem with that.

And the global flood can also be a historical parable, right?

Yep. That's the way Peter treated it.

2 Peter 3
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Johnny Skeptic · 01-06-2010, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

And the global flood can also be a historical parable, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Yep. That's the way Peter treated it.

But not you. Just like most or all other inerrantists, you believe that a global flood occured in spite of the fact that it is a virtual certainty that a global flood did not occur. How do you explain the fact that many conservative Christian experts do not believe that a global flood occured?

Johnny Skeptic · 01-06-2010, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

And the global flood can also be a historical parable, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Yep. That's the way Peter treated it.

Apparently not. Consider the following:

http://www.icr.org/article/842/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry Morris, Ph.D., Institute for Creation Research (ICR)

Biblical Flood in the days of Noah has become a great divide between two watersheds of belief. On the one hand there are those who say it is either a purely mythological event or else possibly a local or regional flood. This group includes practically all evolutionists, but it also includes the "old-earth creationists."

These all accept the so-called geological ages as the approved record of Earth history, recognizing that a global hydraulic cataclysm would have destroyed any evidence for such geological ages. The geological ages concept and a worldwide devastating Flood logically cannot coexist.

On the other hand, "young-earth creationists" accept the Biblical record of the Flood as a literal record of a tremendous cataclysm involving not only a worldwide Flood, but also great tectonic upheavals and volcanic outpourings that completely changed the crust of the earth and its topography in the days of Noah.

Those of us who hold this view are commonly ridiculed as unscientific and worse, so it would be more comfortable and financially rewarding if we would just go along with the evolutionary establishment, downgrade the Flood, and accept the geological ages.

But this we cannot do for a number of, what seem to us, compelling reasons. In fact, I have made a list of 100 reasons for believing in a global Flood. For those who are interested, the list is included in two of my books, The Genesis Record and The Defender's Study Bible.

Biblical Reasons

A few of the many Biblical reasons for believing in the global Flood are briefly summarized below. For those who believe in the Bible as the inerrant word of God, these should be sufficient.

Jesus Christ believed the Old Testament record of the worldwide Flood. Speaking of the antediluvian population, He said: "The flood came, and took them all away" (Matthew 24:39). Evolutionary anthropologists are all convinced that people had spread over the entire Earth by the time assigned to Noah in Biblical chronology, so an anthropologically universal Flood would clearly have required a geographically worldwide Flood.

The apostle Peter believed in a worldwide hydraulic cataclysm. "Whereby the world [Greek, kosmos] that then was, being overflowed [Greek, katakluzo] with water, perished" (II Peter 3:6). The "world" was defined in the previous verse as "the heavens . . . and the earth." Peter also said that "God . . . spared not the old world, but saved Noah . . . bringing in the flood [Greek, kataklusmos] upon the world of the ungodly" (II Peter 2:5). Note also that these words katakluzo and kataklusmos (from which we derive our English word "cataclysm") are applied exclusively in the New Testament to the great Flood of Noah's day.

The Old Testament record of the Flood, which both Christ and Peter accepted as real history, clearly teaches a global Flood. Therefore, it seems to us that Christians, professing to believe in Christ and follow Him, can do no less. For example, the record emphasizes that "all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven . . . and the mountains were covered" (Genesis 7:19,20) with the waters of the Flood. This must have included Mount Ararat on which Noah's Ark landed, and which is now 17,000 feet high. This was no local flood!

Since "all flesh died that moved upon the earth . . . all that was in the dry land" (Genesis 7:21,22), Noah and his sons had to build a huge Ark to preserve animal life for the post-diluvian world—an Ark that can easily be shown to have had more than ample capacity to carry at least two of every known species of land animal (marine animals were not involved, of course). Such an ark was absurdly unnecessary for anything but a global Flood.

God promised that never "shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth" (Genesis 9:11), and He has kept His word for over four thousand years, if the Flood indeed was global. Those Christians who say it was a local flood, however, are in effect accusing God of lying, for there are many devastating local floods every year.

At any rate, you believe that a global flood occured, but a global flood did not occur.

rhutchin · 01-06-2010, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

And the global flood can also be a historical parable, right?

Yep. That's the way Peter treated it.

Apparently not. Consider the following:

http://www.icr.org/article/842/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry Morris, Ph.D., Institute for Creation Research (ICR)

Biblical Flood in the days of Noah has become a great divide between two watersheds of belief. On the one hand there are those who say it is either a purely mythological event or else possibly a local or regional flood. This group includes practically all evolutionists, but it also includes the "old-earth creationists."

These all accept the so-called geological ages as the approved record of Earth history, recognizing that a global hydraulic cataclysm would have destroyed any evidence for such geological ages. The geological ages concept and a worldwide devastating Flood logically cannot coexist.

On the other hand, "young-earth creationists" accept the Biblical record of the Flood as a literal record of a tremendous cataclysm involving not only a worldwide Flood, but also great tectonic upheavals and volcanic outpourings that completely changed the crust of the earth and its topography in the days of Noah.

Those of us who hold this view are commonly ridiculed as unscientific and worse, so it would be more comfortable and financially rewarding if we would just go along with the evolutionary establishment, downgrade the Flood, and accept the geological ages.

But this we cannot do for a number of, what seem to us, compelling reasons. In fact, I have made a list of 100 reasons for believing in a global Flood. For those who are interested, the list is included in two of my books, The Genesis Record and The Defender's Study Bible.

Biblical Reasons

A few of the many Biblical reasons for believing in the global Flood are briefly summarized below. For those who believe in the Bible as the inerrant word of God, these should be sufficient.

Jesus Christ believed the Old Testament record of the worldwide Flood. Speaking of the antediluvian population, He said: "The flood came, and took them all away" (Matthew 24:39). Evolutionary anthropologists are all convinced that people had spread over the entire Earth by the time assigned to Noah in Biblical chronology, so an anthropologically universal Flood would clearly have required a geographically worldwide Flood.

The apostle Peter believed in a worldwide hydraulic cataclysm. "Whereby the world [Greek, kosmos] that then was, being overflowed [Greek, katakluzo] with water, perished" (II Peter 3:6). The "world" was defined in the previous verse as "the heavens . . . and the earth." Peter also said that "God . . . spared not the old world, but saved Noah . . . bringing in the flood [Greek, kataklusmos] upon the world of the ungodly" (II Peter 2:5). Note also that these words katakluzo and kataklusmos (from which we derive our English word "cataclysm") are applied exclusively in the New Testament to the great Flood of Noah's day.

The Old Testament record of the Flood, which both Christ and Peter accepted as real history, clearly teaches a global Flood. Therefore, it seems to us that Christians, professing to believe in Christ and follow Him, can do no less. For example, the record emphasizes that "all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven . . . and the mountains were covered" (Genesis 7:19,20) with the waters of the Flood. This must have included Mount Ararat on which Noah's Ark landed, and which is now 17,000 feet high. This was no local flood!

Since "all flesh died that moved upon the earth . . . all that was in the dry land" (Genesis 7:21,22), Noah and his sons had to build a huge Ark to preserve animal life for the post-diluvian world—an Ark that can easily be shown to have had more than ample capacity to carry at least two of every known species of land animal (marine animals were not involved, of course). Such an ark was absurdly unnecessary for anything but a global Flood.

God promised that never "shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth" (Genesis 9:11), and He has kept His word for over four thousand years, if the Flood indeed was global. Those Christians who say it was a local flood, however, are in effect accusing God of lying, for there are many devastating local floods every year.

At any rate, you believe that a global flood occured, but a global flood did not occur.

I don't see where Morris disagrees.

rhutchin · 01-06-2010, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

And the global flood can also be a historical parable, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Yep. That's the way Peter treated it.

But not you.

I look at it as an historical parable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

How do you explain the fact that many conservative Christian experts do not believe that a global flood occurred?

Can't explain it. Maybe they don't read what the Bible actually says.

Johnny Skeptic · 01-06-2010, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

And the global flood can also be a historical parable, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Yep. That's the way Peter treated it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

But not you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

I look at it as an historical parable.

Then you have changed your mind since you used to claim that a global flood occured.

You are an inerrantist. Most inerrantists believe that a global flood occured. In fact, other than you, I have never come across an inerrantist who does not believe that a global flood occured.

Most inerrantists believe that the earth is young. I have never come across an inerrantist who did not believe that the earth is young. Do you believe that the earth is young?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.