RedSoxFan wrote: Noah's Ark is a myth, just like the whole Bible. If it was a global flood, then the same sediments that are found here in the US, would also be found in other parts of the world. If the Ark was real, wouldnt they have found it yet??? There is little land that has been untouched. I heard about the Mt. Arafat thoery too, I watched a program that used high tech imaging devices to pentrate the "area of question" and it proved that it is just a rock. We are digging ice cores, deep into the frozen in Antarctica, but we can't excatate a stupid Mountain??? The Christians are just scared to find out the real truth, that it just never existed. They might have to come up with somthing real to impose upon the other weak individuals who fall for their failed philosophy.
Let's engage in one final intellectual exercise. For various reasons, Christians who accept the Biblical account of the Great Flood are considered naive. Let's take a look at just a few of those reasons and see what the facts really reveal. Some people say that the Ark was to small to hold all those animals. However, when using even the smallest definition of what a cubit was, the Ark contained approximately 1,396,000 cubic feet of space, was divided into 3 decks, and displaced about 20,000 tons of water. (see Gen.6:1-16) All told, it is estimated that Noah would have had to accommodate about 17,000 pairs of animals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians on board the Ark. Keep in mind that there was no requirement that the elephants, giraffes, hippopotami, and yes, probably even the dinosaurs, had to be adult in size; only that they had to be male and female. Even if they were all adults, the average size of the combined population would be approximately that of a sheep. In that case they would all fit into the space found in 146 two-tiered stock transport cars. Since the Ark was large enough to hold 522 such stock cars, the amount of supplies they had room to carry would be an amount equal to that which could be carried in 376 such cars. So much for the inadequate space argument. # 1
Others have argued that the flood was only a local inundation. However, such an assertion does not fit with the Biblical account which specifically says that the waters covered the tops of the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. That statement alone makes it world-wide in scope, but then so do those found in II Pe.3:6, Heb.11:7, I Pe.3:20, and Jesus' own, words in Lk.17:27. Those who believe in only a local deluge also ignore the fact that while details may be different, every culture which can be traced back to the approximate time of the flood, mentions a worldwide flood. These cultures were themselves formed by the descendants of Noah and were scattered throughout the earth after their languages were confused at the Tower of Babal. As each culture drifted further and further away from worshipping the one true God who created us all, their versions of the flood likewise drifted further and further from the true account as contained in Genesis.
Still other people have said that not enough water would have been available to cover the whole earth. However, since 71% of the earth's surface is currently covered with water to an average depth of 12,500 feet, and there is a great deal of water stored in the polar ice caps (which weren't always frozen), and the waters came up from the deep and down from the atmosphere, there would have been more than enough water to cover the world.
Two things need to be noted in this regard. First, the atmosphere may well have contained much more water than it does now in the form of a vapor mist canopy. Secondly, the mountain ranges may well have been lower prior to the flood than they are now. Therefore, less water would have been needed to cover the tops of the mountains in the predeluvian age.
Finally, many people have wondered how the animals would have overcome their natural fear of man and voluntarily come to Noah. The answer is found in Genesis 9:2 which tells us that animals did not have a 'natural' fear of man until after the flood. We also need to bear in mind that the rest of Genesis tells us that God led the animals to Noah.
So much for some of the more prominent objections which are raised by skeptics. Now, let's take a quick look at merely a few of the geological and paleontological problems which the evolutionists cannot answer, but which are answered by the Genesis account of the flood.
1) The flood would explain the sudden disappearance of hundreds of species which failed to adapt to the great climatic changes which occurred after the flood. (The dinosaurs would of course be a prime example of this.)
2) The disappearance of the vapor-mist canopy, which previously provided a natural greenhouse effect on the Earth, would explain the geological evidence of a tropical climate which was universal until after the flood.
3) The flood would explain the size of the otherwise inexplicably huge fossil beds found in Africa, Sicily, and numerous other locations.
4) The weight of all that extra water on the earth's surface could easily account for the vertical drops measured in miles, previously mentioned by Dr. Landes.
5) The geologic upheaval which took place during the flood, and shortly thereafter as the world settled down, would serve as a logical explanation for the location of marine fossils on mountain tops, the apparent young age of many mountain ranges, and the unbroken wave pattern which appears in many rock layers. This pattern could not have been formed in 'solid' rock unless the rock layers in which these patterns appear were in a liquid, gel-like or pliable condition when the layers moved, which is the state they would have been in immediately after the flood. Remember, 75% of the rock found on the continents is sedimentary rock, which is rock that has been laid down by water.
Concerning the mountain building which took place during or immediately after the flood, note Psalm 104:8 as translated in either the RSV, NAS, LB, or ML translations. (While not directly related to the flood, please note also, that the 'continental drift' need not have taken hundreds of millions of years to accomplish, but may well have occurred either during the life of Peleg "...because in his time the earth was divided" (Gen 10:25),or as a direct result of the geologic upheavel associated with the upsurge of the fountains of the deep.)
6) The suddenness of the climatic change after the flood would explain the quick frozen condition of the Siberian Mammoths - something no ice age theory has satisfactorily accounted for.
7) The mysterious fossil finds of Leakey and others would suggest the very sudden burial in a substance other than hot lava or ash, of many soft-bodied creatures, and hence their remarkable state of preservation.
8) The flood would also explain the massive simultaneous burial of the billions of tons of vegetation necessary to account for the coal, and the simultaneous burial of the billions of animals necessary to account for the oil which is found in the earth today. Note, it doesn't take millions of years for coal to form. It has been formed in laboratories in a few minutes.# 2 Oil has been produced from organic material in less than 6 years under controled conditions, # 3 and is acknowledged by modern geologists to have occured naturally in as little as a few thousand years. # 4
9) The massive geological formations such as the Decca Plateau of India, could most reasonably be explained by the major upheaval of such a catastrophic flood.
The list goes on and on. # 5 The point is, the Genesis account of the flood provides us with sensible answers to questions which hadn't even been asked when the Bible was written; whereas, evolutionist's cannot yet provide answers to the questions they themselves have asked. All the philosophy of evolution can do is give conflicting answers to some, ignore others, and call the remainder of them 'mysteries' Now I ask you, "Which is the intellectual approach?"
This reply is a brief snippet of an IQ test.
http://www.unlimitedglory.org/txtevcha8.htm