the fake world flood of genesis

@ponderable said
Assume a world without mountains. Just more or less flat lands, and assume further water beyond the startsphere where it can't rain down easily (would be a Handy Shield against Radiation from space). Imagine the axis of roatation perpenticualr to the plane of the Orbit around the sun.

Now imagine the tilting of the axis of roataion. The water comes down, Continents brea ...[text shortened]... sing mountains (one of which is the one the ark is Landing upon...

Just one possibility to ponder

The difficulty with this model is the sheer amount of energy involved. The landmasses would have melted at the collision lines. Really it would be a complete mess.

The thing with floods is that it's a representation of the unknown. Like when one has dreams of cluttered room, or a soaked one. It's no surprise that many cultures have flood myths, they would.

@mister-moggy said
so after the dove came back with the olive branch and the "water receded", where did all the water that covered the earth ( enough to swamp cover mount ararat ) go ?

and how did the fresh water fish survive the salted ocean, or did the salt water fish survive the unsalted world fresh water flood.

( i know....it was another "miracle"....always the fall back position when reason hits you in the face like a brick ).

There are so many impossibilities, and I do not mean mere improbabilities, but hard impossibilities, in the world-wide flood myth, that one hardly knows where to begin mentioning them. Many of the impossibilities were discussed at length in a previous thread. I will recount one of them here.

The Book of Genesis claims that it rained for 40 days and 40 nights (Gen. 7:4), and that water shot up out of the ground. It also claims that the entire Earth was covered, including mountain tops (Gen. 7:19). So, first of all, the Earth was not flat; there were mountains already, and the waters covered them completely. Now, in order to cover all the Earth to higher than the mountain tops, you would need a mass of water greater than all the oceans currently on the surface of the Earth; this is simple math (I won't bother to calculate the cubic miles of water needed to cover a circumference up to the top of Everest); it should be obvious to anyone without doing the actual math that the total volume of water from the ocean-bottoms up to sea level before the flood is considerably smaller than the volume needed to cover from sea level to up to the tops of the mountains. In short, you would need a mass of water much greater than the total amount of water already in the oceans and rivers and lakes.

Well, it rained. So that's where the water came from, right? Wrong. The total amount of water on our planet is fixed, it's a closed system; whatever is not on the surface in the form of oceans, lakes and rivers, is in the atmosphere, in the clouds; whatever falls from the clouds is simply a recycled portion of the total, it isn't more water. Let it rain for a 100 or a 1000 days; it still isn't going to cover the mountains, it's still the same fixed amount of water.

Well, water shot out up out of the ground, it says in the Bible. So that's where the rest of the water came from, right? Wrong again. As mentioned above, there would have to have been more water than in the Pacific, Atlantic, Indian, and all the other surface oceans put together to cover the Earth to above the mountain tops; in other words, another mass of water larger than the mass already on the surface would have to have lain concealed underground, in caverns. There is no evidence for such a subterranean ocean. Moreover, even supposing there were such a gigantic subterranean ocean, suddenly transporting it up to the surface would leave an empty cavern below the crust of the Earth, which would cave in due to the weight of the water now above it.

I leave aside how big the vertical shafts would have to have been to get that quantity of water to flow up against gravity to the surface, or why the water, once up, would not simply have flowed immediately back down the channels and into the subterranean caverns.

I think one either:

a) has to appeal to miracles (God just made the extra mass of water appear from nowhere and from nothing, and then made it disappear again back to nowhere/nothing); in which case, one has to question why God would engage in such ludicrous fallderall, when he could simply have THOUGHT evil people out of existence in an instant, spared Noah and his family quietly in their homes, and left all the innocent animals well enough alone;

or

b) relativize the story and say that there was probably a localized flood which, to the people living there in ancient times, with their inadequate knowledge of how big the Earth was and is, seemed much more wide-spread than it really was. I.e., there was a flood, but it was local, not world-wide;

or

c) interpret the whole story as allegory, not historical/geological fact at all.

@ponderable said
Assume a world without mountains. Just more or less flat lands, and assume further water beyond the startsphere where it can't rain down easily (would be a Handy Shield against Radiation from space). Imagine the axis of roatation perpenticualr to the plane of the Orbit around the sun.

Now imagine the tilting of the axis of roataion. The water comes down, Continents brea ...[text shortened]... sing mountains (one of which is the one the ark is Landing upon...

Just one possibility to ponder

I've had a couple lengthy discussions on this here in the past and your comments agree on what I've said.
The bible does answer most of this for us but as usual there are many that don't really read what it says. Then others here just live on arguing no matter what is being discussed.
But look at this at Gen 2:5 "No bush of the field was yet on the earth and no vegetation of the field had begun sprouting, (because Jehovah God had not made it rain on the earth) and there was no man to cultivate the ground. 6 (But a mist would go up from the earth, and it watered the entire surface of the ground.)
So it says that Jehovah had not made it rain yet because there was no plant life but once there was it was watered by this mist that would come up nightly, not rain, and this mist would be adequate enough to water the "entire surface" of the ground or the whole planet. The cloud layer or canopy that was above the earth was there for a few reasons and one was like you said to protect humans from the suns damage and to keep the earth in a hot house like condition which is the perfect condition for all life on earth to live in. So that is why both animal life and plant life are found today in the polar regions frozen from another time period or before the flood. Life could have lived there easily before the flood changed the whole makeup of the planet.
With untold billions of gallons of water under the surface of the planet that made it possible to water the entire planet each and every night, there was no need for rain which only would come from the sky and with all of the problems that storms can cause to humans, animals and the earth in general with the death and destruction the storms can cause. True some of these things are beautiful like a huge red and orange sunset. But look at the destruction these storms can cause. So yes the huge mountains we have now on earth would not have existed either. All the twisted earth that we see today did not exist to the extremes as we see now. Again some is beautiful but look at how so much of the earth is waste land or desert or frozen and not safe for humans or animals at all. Way too much.

@mister-moggy
Much went back underground, evaporated back up into our atmosphere and the vast majority of it filled up all the new chasms that now existed that didn't before the flood. I'm sure your aware of many of the deeper chasms in the seas like the Mariana Trench for one? Just take that one trench and fill it up with water up to the sea level that exist now?

Mariana Trench - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench
The Mariana Trench or Marianas Trench is located in the western Pacific Ocean about 200 kilometres (124 mi) east of the Mariana Islands; it is the deepest trench in the world. It is a crescent-shaped trough in the Earth's crust averaging about 2,550 km (1,580 mi) long and 69 km (43 mi) wide." And it's about 36K in depth.

So how much water do you think that would take? 10 clouds worth? A hundred clouds worth? Let me know....

So the point is it's all still here.....

@moonbus said
There are so many impossibilities, and I do not mean mere improbabilities, but hard impossibilities, in the world-wide flood myth, that one hardly knows where to begin mentioning them. Many of the impossibilities were discussed at length in a previous thread. I will recount one of them here.

The Book of Genesis claims that it rained for 40 days and 40 nights (Gen. 7:4), an ...[text shortened]... orld-wide;

or

c) interpret the whole story as allegory, not historical/geological fact at all.

Scripture teaches the world started completely underwater, why would it be impossible to cover it again?

@kellyjay said
In the beginning, the world was covered with water; it was how it all started. It receded once before, and the salt and freshwater we're sorted out then too, when God setup the world for it’s soon to be inhabitants on land and water.

When you put it like that it all seems so obvious.

@wolfgang59
Let me ask you this about the bible.... Moses was somewhat educated within the Egyptian world but the things he wrote down in Genesis about the accounts of "creation" as the bible calls it and in the manor and in most cases a step by step of those events were obviously not things he learned in Egypt.
Where did he get this knowledge to write those events in the Bible? Did he pull it up online? Did he go to school? Has he seen the earth from space? Did he see all these steps happen from space just as is described in Genesis? Did he smoke too much weed?
The answer would be no, correct? Then where did he hear this? Who explained it to him so he could write in a very exact and precise way when so that when we look into the bible today we can see exactly what he wrote? And what he wrote down that has still survived up to now, is from God. The one who created it all.
Were you there? Do you have a higher insight of this explanation then God has and had written down by Moses?

@galveston75 said
Do you have a higher insight of this explanation then God has and had written down by Moses?

Doesn't this question presuppose that the person you are asking already agrees with you about Moses getting his "higher insight" from "God"?

Do you know what "begging the question" means?

@galveston75 said
Where did he get this knowledge to write those events in the Bible?

What "events" did Moses have "knowledge" of and write about?

@galveston75 said
Where did he get this knowledge to write those events in the Bible? Did he pull it up online? Did he go to school? Has he seen the earth from space? Did he see all these steps happen from space just as is described in Genesis?

Can't the same kinds of questions be asked about longstanding supernatural mythologies in places like Australasia, the Pacific, China, South Asia, Africa, the Americas?

@fmf said
What "events" did Moses have "knowledge" of and write about?

I would like to hear about this amazing knowledge also .
Maybe I missed his treatise on anti-matter .

Folks, if God could cause a perfectly righteous man, I mean totally perfect moral human being, to suffer and die on a cross, how is a flood of Noah's world hard to believe?

Jesus of Nazareth came under both the wrath of sinful men and the judgment of God for our sins. He taught so. He believed so. He said He came FOR this. And nature itself testified that something beyond human control was associated with the last three hours of His crucifixion.

The dark day at the time of Christ's crucifixion was not a solar eclipse yet was recorded elsewhere in the world. An earthquake was neither something human beings could coincidentally cause to happen at that hour.

Awesome signs and wonders accompanied the death of the Messiah (Matthew 27:51–53). The earth shook. The temple veil was torn in two. The tombs were opened and, later, many of the saints were resurrected from the dead! Even the sun "failed" for about three hours. The Creator of the universe and "The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" had died (John 1:29).

https://www.lcg.org/lcn/2018/march-april/crucifixion-darkness-and-events-surrounding-christs-sacrifice

It is a greater mystery that such a Son of God should come under judgment then that an ancient human world should be completely flooded imo.

Ancient Accounts

The solar eclipse theory actually goes back almost 2,000 years and was argued by such famous figures as the Greek scholar (and Christian apologist) Origen. In the third century, Origen wrote in Against Celsus that the darkness, earthquake and opening of tombs was all proof that the crucifixion had indeed happened. In his writings, Origen referred to an earlier account by one Phlegon of Tralles, who stated that it was an eclipse during the reign of Tiberius—probably in 29ad—that accompanied the crucifixion of Christ. However, the "eclipses" that Origen and Phlegon are referring to were natural solar eclipses, such as those listed by NASA on its website. But, as we will see, when darkness fell upon the earth for three hours, it was not—and could not have been—a solar eclipse that occurred during Jesus' crucifixion!

Copied without permission from
https://www.lcg.org/lcn/2018/march-april/crucifixion-darkness-and-events-surrounding-christs-sacrifice

The Crucifixion Darkness and the Events Surrounding Christ's Sacrifice

Conrtinued

Notice another ancient account, one that gives more details and precisely matches the gospel records. The respected third-century historian Sextus Julius Africanus wrote, "[I]n the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth—manifestly that one of which we speak. But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe?… But it was a darkness induced by God, because the Lord happened then to suffer" (The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Translations of The Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325, p. 137).

Africanus was quoting an earlier historian named Thallus. Thallus wrote his history in 52ad, which was only about twenty years after the crucifixion, at roughly the same time the Apostle James wrote his epistle and Paul wrote 1 and 2 Thessalonians and Galatians, and about a decade before Matthew, Mark or Luke were written! Notice that Thallus points out that the "eclipse" occurred during the time of a "full moon," and that it was no normal eclipse: it was "a darkness induced by God." Thallus understood what we also know today: that solar eclipses only occur when the moon is between the earth and the sun, which is impossible during a full moon. In ancient Greek, the word translated as eclipse does not always mean that the moon has blocked out the sun from shining on the earth, or that the earth has blocked the sun from shining on the moon. The word originally simply meant "to fail" or "to come to an end" such as in Luke 22:32 ...

https://www.lcg.org/lcn/2018/march-april/crucifixion-darkness-and-events-surrounding-christs-sacrifice

Though in the Bible the flood of Noah comes first, I was led to believe in it primarily (as an adult) after deeming that Christ taught it. If it was good enough for this most righteous and honest of all men, it must be good.

And the divine judgment of Christ, the Son of God, on Calvary is closer to us and imo even more astounding then a great flood which apparently, multiple cultures have a distant memory of.

I'm not going to debate anyone here about Jehovah's wisdom that is shown all throughout the Bible and all we see that he's created on earth. Either one see's it or they don't. It amazes me how tiny little humans have the gall to doubt and even challenge it.

Proverbs 1:7
The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of knowledge. Only fools despise wisdom and discipline.

Proverbs 1:29
Because they hated knowledge, And they did not choose to fear Jehovah.

Proverbs 2:5
Then you will understand the fear of Jehovah, And you will find the knowledge of God.

Proverbs 2:6
For Jehovah himself gives wisdom; From his mouth come knowledge and discernment.

Proverbs 9:10
The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of wisdom ,And knowledge of the Most Holy One is understanding.

Proverbs 22:12
The eyes of Jehovah safeguard knowledge, But He overturns the words of the treacherous.

1 Samuel 2:3
Do not keep speaking with haughtiness; Let nothing arrogant come from your mouth, For Jehovah is a God of knowledge, And by him deeds are rightly evaluated.