The "flood"

[muses_nightmare]

Some christian program is on and they have some "scientist" discussing the so called flood. These people seriously annoy me to the point that I talk to the tv. He's discussing the "flood" as if it makes complete logical sense. I'm sorry but you really can't call yourself a geologist (which I believe is what he's calling himself) if you are under the impression that the only way that fossils could have been formed is by large amounts of water (ie. the flood), and that there is no other way that sediment could have been deposited.

He's also claiming that despite his education telling him he knows the earth is billions of years old, he doesn't believe that.

The fact that they assume that one must be atheistic in order to believe in evolution just annoys me. I'm sorry but just because you take your religions myths to be fact doesn't mean that everyone else does. I worship the ancient Egyptian gods, does that mean I take every myth and legend to do with them on earth as fact? No it really doesn't.

The willfull ignorance just astounds me! I should really learn to just change the channel. :rolleyes:

[HYHYBT]

Drives me up the wall! I've been told that you can't trust *anything* in the bible unless you believe everything in it from Genesis to Revelation to be precisely and literally true. And if that's your most basic, immovable assumption then you wind up judging all other evidence by whether it can be squeezed into that or not. My 'favorite' is when people say that, though God made everything in one week a few thousand years ago, he made it as if it had been around billions of years longer and formed by the same natural processes that would proceed from then on, including light that would have reached us from stars if it had had time, etc. I'm probably going to explain this the wrong way, but the reason it's my 'favorite' is that they believe God wrote the Bible as-is, so if it's not true then God's a liar. But really, assuming for the moment that God did write Genesis, or caused it to be written as-is, which way would really be lying: 1) telling an allegorical, metaphorical, mythological, whatever tale that gets the most essential points in in a way that your audience will understand, or building the entire universe in such a way that anyone who examines it closely will come to the conclusion that it's billions of years old?

[IDrinkaRum]

Ah, yes, but the Christian faith is not the only religion/culture that has "the flood" story.

If you do a quick google search, there are many pages explaining how religions/cultures as old as the Jews and some even older all have flood stories in their myths/legends/these-actually-happened stories.

However, I don't believe that the other religions said that's the way fossils were deposited, but I have no looked closely into the experts of the religions.

[muses_nightmare]

I've heard that too and In the past I've done some research on this, but I honestly can't remember, it's really been awhile. I try to steer clear of it because it makes me angry. There really isn't geological evidence for a global flood, despite what the creationists think. I've even read stuff on how the grand canyon could have only been created by a massive flood. Which makes no sense whatsoever.

The guy that was talking actually explained why it couldn't have just been a regional flood. Basically his explaination was "why build an ark instead of just moving to another place?"

[gremcint]

The bible was written by men, and rewritten by men multiple times.

[joe hx]

Mesopotamia - the area where many civilizations began - floods a lot, and unpredictably so. Therefore it is not surprising that many cultures/religions have stories of "the big one."

In the Bible, there were these half human/half angel monsters called Nephilim. Somehow these creatures survived the flood, but I see no evidence of them on Noah's ark. I really don't know what point I'm trying to make in this paragraph, I just find this interesting.

[guywithashovel]

There is not enough water on the planet for a worldwide flood to have ever occurred. Even if you melt both of the polar caps, the entire planet would not be flooded. Sure, some areas would be underwater, but there would still be some land left.

Now, they have tried to get around this by saying that the land was lower and the mountains were shorter before the flood, and that during and after the flood the land changed and the mountains suddenly got taller. However, there is absolutely no evidence that any of this happened.

Anymore now, I don't let these people get to me. In almost every discipline, there are fringe groups that push all sorts of conspiracy theories. For example, in the social sciences, you have the Holocaust Deniers (many of whom claim to be Ph.D-level scholars). You also have the 9/11 Truthers, astrologists, the people who think the Moon Landing was staged, numerologists, and lots of others.

[joe hx]

Now, they have tried to get around this by saying that the land was lower and the mountains were shorter before the flood, and that during and after the flood the land changed and the mountains suddenly got taller. However, there is absolutely no evidence that any of this happened.

Just a thought (and please don't think for a minute I actually believe this), maybe the mountains got bigger because they absorbed the water?

[BroomJockey]

Well, mountains do get taller over time. That's the whole reason they exist. As for ever being short enough in the span of human history to be covered? Doubtful.

[muses_nightmare]

Not all mountains get taller, it really depends on how the mountains were formed, since there can be mountains formed from batholiths being exposed, and also from the collision of techtonic plates. With the batholiths, which are essentially giant boulders made of igneous rock (from what I remember from Geology class) they can be weathered down.

[Flyndaran]

My father was a devout religion is personal believer in rational science. The bible never said how god created the universe and to put words and actions into his hands is blasphemous, isn't it?

Personally with how science has disproven part after part after part after part of this so called divinely inspired book, I can't see how any rational person can believe any part of it.

[DrFaroohk]

You want proof, rock solid proof that everything in the bible is true?

The last books in the old testament deal with prophets talking about a magical savior coming to deliver the people from evil. Then, hundreds of years (or so) later, HE ACTUALLY COMES. They flat out predicted a future event and it came true!

You can't doubt good, logically sound proof like that, can you?

Seriously though, people who try to prove the bible is historically accurate are really missing the point. The point is that you don't know! It can't be proven, there is no proof, it's just a fable. But for those who STILL dedicate their lives to this thing, based purely on faith, with nothing else to go on, well, there's supposed to be a special place in the afterlife for them.

It's basically like gambling.

[Bloodsoul]

Generally the only flood stories I've ever seen on television were the ones dealing with the.. Black Sea, I believe? That whole basin suddenly getting flooded and the folk living there thinking it was the end of the world, story gets embeleshed over the years, purple monkey dishwasher, etc.

Though I liked the Exodus stories, too, involving Thera's eruption.

[Mr Slugger]

There is not enough water on the planet for a worldwide flood to have ever occurred. Even if you melt both of the polar caps, the entire planet would not be flooded. Sure, some areas would be underwater, but there would still be some land left.


Haven't you ever seen waterworld? I can happen :P

On a real note. There is a theory that actually makes perfect sense that there was a real flood. I saw it on the discovery channel once. Basically the Mediterranean was once a lake with a much lower water level and in some areas much lower land level. At some point there was a earthquake that broke apart the opening into the atlantic. (Arches of Hecules I think it's called) That allowed the water from the atlantic to pour in and flood out that entire region, and possibly went as far as Iran in the initial washout.

Was that world wide? No but it was probably as much of the world that those people knew.

[Flyndaran]

Humans have lived near water, with its constant chance of flooding, since before we were human. Trying to name any particular water danger as the biblical flood seems a futile guess.

[Slytovhand]

Of course a flood happened - lots of them...

Given we're still in the warmer part of an ice-age, and such warmer times come and go (across tens of thousands of years), it would make sense that some flooding - even flash flooding - may occur.

Yes, there is the geological evidence across the planet for it (remember, at one stage, most of inland Australia was one massive lake!)

Is it the Flood as referred to in the Bible? Well, take a bit of history, add some religion, add some more religion, and you've got yourself a great tale to make yourself feel important, and to keep the followers in line (ie, Sodom and Gomorrah).

As for connecting it to other 'myths'... well, just because A is hogwash is no reason to automatically presume that B, C and D are as well! (IMHO, Jesus was a person who lived about a couple of thousand years ago,and had a message to preach.. not to differently to today... right time, right place - religion!)


(FTR, I'm what would be called a "9/11 Truther"... as per my thread on the topic...)

[RecoveringKinkoid]

See, here's my take on the flood story: Did it happen? Who knows. It doesn't matter.

The message is what matters. Guy takes a leap of faith, against all odds, against ridicule, against what is humanly possible. He does it anyway. He holds his faith tight and leaps into the storm.

I don't think the point is that it happned. The point is in the lesson.

But then, I'm Episcopalean and probably going to The Bad Place anyways. ;)

[Flyndaran]

See, here's my take on the flood story: Did it happen? Who knows. It doesn't matter.

The message is what matters. Guy takes a leap of faith, against all odds, against ridicule, against what is humanly possible. He does it anyway. He holds his faith tight and leaps into the storm.

I don't think the point is that it happned. The point is in the lesson.

But then, I'm Episcopalean and probably going to The Bad Place anyways. ;)

Then that makes Aesop's fables equally important as biblical parables, right?

[Nyoibo]

Then that makes Aesop's fables equally important as biblical parables, right?

In terms of taking lessons for life from them, yes.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Then that makes Aesop's fables equally important as biblical parables, right?

Depends on what context you personally place these stories in, but sure. Guess that depends on the person doing the reading.

[Flyndaran]

Depends on what context you personally place these stories in, but sure. Guess that depends on the person doing the reading.

Eh, context is too often used for moral relativism and justification for their books showing heroes doing evil.

Lot doing his daughters was ok, because they got him drunk first.
Lot trying to give his daughters instead of the angels masquerading as human visitors to the mob outside his door
All of Leviticus and its edicts that no one today follows... except that one about raping your male slaves like your female ones being bad meaning gay is wrong.

You have to put them "in context" to make any of that crap non-objectionable.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

That's not really what I mean.

My point is that sometimes the point of the story is not in the details or even if it's true or not.