Local Flood vs Global Flood

[Fortigurn]

Ok, next step is determining whether or not a Black Sea icemelt flood is datable within the time frame indicated in the Bible for Noah's flood.

From what I can see, the Biblical data places Noah's flood at around 3,000 BC, with commentators such as Josephus and Eusebius suggesting dates around this time.

[Gman]

Ok, next step is determining whether or not a Black Sea icemelt flood is datable within the time frame indicated in the Bible for Noah's flood.

From what I can see, the Biblical data places Noah's flood at around 3,000 BC, with commentators such as Josephus and Eusebius suggesting dates around this time.

I don't see how this could fit given the timezones from Josephus and Eusebius. But then again it is possible that this date given by them is "questionable" at best.

[Fortigurn]

I don't see how this could fit given the timezones from Josephus and Eusebius.

That's my problem.

But then again it is possible that this date given by them is "questionable" at best.

Well between the two of them they give about three dates. I've seen date ranges for the Genesis flood (based simply on the Biblical data), from around 3,100 BC to 2,300 BC, but I've never seen any date earlier than 3,100 BC.

Do you have a model for how you believe the Biblical date data should be interpreted?

[Gman]

Fortigurn,

I'm basing this on Reason's to Believe model, this web site "godandscience", and William Ryan and Walter Pitman, geologists from Columbia University. Here is one quote from RTB:

"Using the relatively accurate dates available for both Abram (Abraham) and Peleg to calibrate the genealogies may help guide some of the guesswork. Biblical and other historical records establish that Abraham lived about 4,000 years ago. Genesis 10:25 says that in Peleg's time "the earth was divided." Radiocarbon dating places the breaking of the Bering land bridge (an event that ended human migration from Eurasia to North and South America until the advent of ships) at 11,000 years ago. If the life spans recorded in the Genesis 5 and 11 genealogies are approximately proportional to the actual passage of time, then the dates for Abraham and Peleg would place the Flood of Noah's day roughly 20,000 to 30,000 years ago and the creation of Adam and Eve a few tens of thousands of years earlier."

This would place the flood around an ice age, if not the one melting around 12,500 b.c..

Also can you show me where Eusebius and Josephus thought the dates were around 3,100 BC?

[Fortigurn]

Fortigurn,

I'm basing this on Reason's to Believe model, this web site "godandscience", and William Ryan and Walter Pitman, geologists from Columbia University. Here is one quote from RTB:

"Using the relatively accurate dates available for both Abram (Abraham) and Peleg to calibrate the genealogies may help guide some of the guesswork. Biblical and other historical records establish that Abraham lived about 4,000 years ago. Genesis 10:25 says that in Peleg's time "the earth was divided." Radiocarbon dating places the breaking of the Bering land bridge (an event that ended human migration from Eurasia to North and South America until the advent of ships) at 11,000 years ago. If the life spans recorded in the Genesis 5 and 11 genealogies are approximately proportional to the actual passage of time, then the dates for Abraham and Peleg would place the Flood of Noah's day roughly 20,000 to 30,000 years ago and the creation of Adam and Eve a few tens of thousands of years earlier."

This would place the flood around an ice age, if not the one melting around 12,500 b.c..

Ok, I missed a few things here. I'm about happy with the time of Abraham, but I'm struggling to see how you get at 20,000 to 30,000 years ago for the flood, on the basis of the genealogies.

I also can't help thinking that the end of an ice age, and flooding by glacial melting, doesn't sound much like the flood of Noah, which was caused by rain and the fountains of the deep breaking up.

Also can you show me where Eusebius and Josephus thought the dates were around 3,100 BC?

For Josephus, you have to add up the genealogies he gives (see Hasel's paper here). For Eusebius, I can't recall the precise passage, but he arrives at 2,959 BC (which is startlingly close to the 2,900 BC flood), and appeals to the Assyrian and Babylonian flood records (which record the 2,900 BC flood), as evidence for the flood outside the Bible.

Dates given in other texts (based in their genealogies):

* Masoretic Text: 2462
* LXX Alexandrinus: 3242
* LXX Vaticanus: 3342
* Samarian Pentateuch: 3112
* Seder Olam: 2232

[Gman]

Ok, I missed a few things here. I'm about happy with the time of Abraham, but I'm struggling to see how you get at 20,000 to 30,000 years ago for the flood, on the basis of the genealogies.

From what I know about these genealogies, they are incomplete. In the New Testament, Luke's account of the biblical genealogies leading to Jesus Christ includes a generation called "Cainan" not found in the Genesis account. Therefore they are not as reliable as some may think... Also many of the names could be family group names of many given generation of peoples, not just an individual name... Please read more of these problems from these links provided...

Source: http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/sld013.html
Source: http://www.reasons.org/resources/apolog ... shtml?main

I also can't help thinking that the end of an ice age, and flooding by glacial melting, doesn't sound much like the flood of Noah, which was caused by rain and the fountains of the deep breaking up.

No, I don't think that an ice age contributed to the flood directly. What could have happened is that the environment in and around Mount Ararat was much different back then. It is now mostly a desert, but back then the rivers from the ice melts would have brought the desert alive with more water in various places. Now when you add God's flood to it, it would have been more devastating since the area would have been more water saturated with less places for people to run to or hide..

[Turgonian]

Oh, the genealogies are reliable. It's just that ben was translated incorrectly. Rather than meaning 'son', it means 'male descendant' (which can be grandson, great-grandson...you get the idea).

[Fortigurn]

From what I know about these genealogies, they are incomplete. In the New Testament, Luke's account of the biblical genealogies leading to Jesus Christ includes a generation called "Cainan" not found in the Genesis account. Therefore they are not as reliable as some may think... Also many of the names could be family group names of many given generation of peoples, not just an individual name...

I'm familiar with this argument, but there are problems with it. On what basis do we then date Adam to approximately 30,000 years ago, if we don't know the time duration these genealogies cover? Is it really credible to sugget that these genealogies extend over some 30,000 years?

Are there any texs which we can use to demonstrate that genealogies were recorded with gaps of 1,000 years or more?

And why is it that when we add up the genealogies as if they were valid as they read at face value, we actually arrive at accurate dates for historically verifiable events?

No, I don't think that an ice age contributed to the flood directly. What could have happened is that the environment in and around Mount Ararat was much different back then. It is now mostly a desert, but back then the rivers from the ice melts would have brought the desert alive with more water in various places. Now when you add God's flood to it, it would have been more devastating since the area would have been more water saturated with less places for people to run to or hide..

That's possible, but where then in Biblical history do you place the Mesopotamian mega-flood (which Biblical events do you think took place around 2,900 BC?), and how could it possibly avoid mention in the Bible?

[Gman]

I'm familiar with this argument, but there are problems with it. Is it really credible to sugget that these genealogies extend over some 30,000 years?

Fortigurn, yes.. Some scholars would even argue that he Biblical genealogies can be stretched indefinitely. However, most reliable and conservative Hebrew scholars place the biblical date for the creation of Adam and Eve sometime between about 10,000 to 60,000 years with the outside limits at about 7,000 and 100,000 years.

On what basis do we then date Adam to approximately 30,000 years ago, if we don't know the time duration these genealogies cover?

Besides the biblical calendar, there are three other factors that we can base these dates on.. The historical calendar, biochemical dates, and data convergence.

"The historical calendar is based on evidence of religious artifacts and altars, the only spiritual species ever to inhabit Earth, appears to be 8,000 to 24,000 years ago. The earliest advanced art (like sophisticated cave drawings of animals and hunting rituals) dates back 33,000 years. Archaeologists see a sudden burst, of jewelry making-actually outstripping toolmaking-that dates to 40,000 years ago. This date coincides with the first evidence for clothing. The earliest evidence for complex language also dates to about 40,000 years ago."

"The biochemical dates can be seen through DNA. By measuring DNA differences across several generations in different families, geneticists can measure the rates at which mtDNA and Y-DNA mutations occur. Such rates allow them to determine the dates back to the most recent common male and female ancestors for all humanity. These dates are 37,000 to 49,000 years ago for the most recent common male ancestor (Noah) and about 50,000 years ago for the most recent common female ancestor (Eve)."

"Data convergence gives us a brief review of the data showing that the fossil and archaeological dates for the origin of humanity coincide with the dates for the most ancient religious artifacts. The biochemical history of humans proves consistent with these dates and, further, shows that the Neanderthals were morphologically and biochemically distinct from humans. All the dates and data fit the roughly estimated biblical dates for the creation of Adam and Eve."

All of this information was taken from Dr. Hugh Ross's book "A Matter of Days".

Are there any texs which we can use to demonstrate that genealogies were recorded with gaps of 1,000 years or more?

And why is it that when we add up the genealogies as if they were valid as they read at face value, we actually arrive at accurate dates for historically verifiable events

"The flexible, literal meanings of the Hebrew words "ben" and "ab" allow for many more generations than are listed in the biblical genealogical records. Therefore, instead of referring to a direct son, the genealogy could be referring to a family line that culminated in the next named "son."

Source: //www.godandscience.org/evolution/sld015.html

Also the verses Deuteronomy 7:9, 1 Chronicles 16:15, Psalms 105:8 seem to indicate that humans have been around for at least 1000 generations.

That's possible, but where then in Biblical history do you place the Mesopotamian mega-flood (which Biblical events do you think took place around 2,900 BC?), and how could it possibly avoid mention in the Bible?

The Mesopotamian mega-flood was Noah's flood. It was not avoided in the Bible... The question is, however, where did it originate? Was it north around Mount Ararat or directly in the Mesopotamian Plains?



Here is a good view of the Mesopotamian plains with the mountains of Ararat to the north. How is Noah's ark going to land in the "mountains of Ararat" if the flood originated in the Mesopotamian Plains which flow southward to the Persian Gulf?

[Fortigurn]

Besides the biblical calendar, there are three other factors that we can base these dates on.. The historical calendar, biochemical dates, and data convergence.

I'm an OEC, so it's not the number of years which is the issue. I'm happy with the idea that humans have been around for thousands of years.

The physical evidence you've provided demonstrates that humans have been around for thousands of years, and I agree. What I need to see is evidence that Adam and Eve were in fact th first of those humans.

"The flexible, literal meanings of the Hebrew words "ben" and "ab" allow for many more generations than are listed in the biblical genealogical records. Therefore, instead of referring to a direct son, the genealogy could be referring to a family line that culminated in the next named "son."

But is it a common feature of genealogies to skip hundreds or thousands of years? When we read the genealogies at face value, we reach Noah's flood at around 2,900 BC. This suggests that the genealogies should be read at face value.

Also the verses Deuteronomy 7:9, 1 Chronicles 16:15, Psalms 105:8 seem to indicate that humans have been around for at least 1000 generations.

I don't have a problem with humans being around for thousands of years. that's a separate issue though.

The Mesopotamian mega-flood was Noah's flood. It was not avoided in the Bible...

Ok, so the flood dates to about 2,900 BC. Where does that leave the genealogies?

Here is a good view of the Mesopotamian plains with the mountains of Ararat to the north. How is Noah's ark going to land in the "mountains of Ararat" if the flood originated in the Mesopotamian Plains which flow southward to the Persian Gulf?

In an earlier post I quoted a hyro-geologist who suggested that the Mesopotamian mega-flood was partly the result of strong southerly winds blowing north, and creating a damming effect preventing the emptying of the flood basin into the Gulf. This would have propelled both the waters and the Ark northward.

For the mega-flood to occur in Mesopotamia at all, the Gulf exit would have had to have been blocked in some way, wherever the water originated from.

[Gman]

I'm an OEC, so it's not the number of years which is the issue. I'm happy with the idea that humans have been around for thousands of years.

I know you are... Me too... I've been enjoying this discussion and I hope you are too. I'm not offended at all by your questions. They are good ones..

The physical evidence you've provided demonstrates that humans have been around for thousands of years, and I agree. What I need to see is evidence that Adam and Eve were in fact th first of those humans.

I think they are.. But how are we going to trace that being so long ago? I don't really know yet. I'm still reading some of Dr. Ross's books, maybe we will stumble over it.. We are still trying to find physical evidence for Adam and Eve today, so I don't think adding more years to this would change anything...

But is it a common feature of genealogies to skip hundreds or thousands of years? When we read the genealogies at face value, we reach Noah's flood at around 2,900 BC. This suggests that the genealogies should be read at face value.

Yes, but then again if we compare the genealogies from the old and new testaments they seem to say otherwise..

Ok, so the flood dates to about 2,900 BC. Where does that leave the genealogies?

I see you are going off your powerpoint slide.. I don't think it does date to 2,900 BC based on this evidence... It's hard to say since the genealogies seem to be incomplete... While 100,000 years may be a stretch, 50,000 to 10,000 years may sound reasonable..

In an earlier post I quoted a hyro-geologist who suggested that the Mesopotamian mega-flood was partly the result of strong southerly winds blowing north, and creating a damming effect preventing the emptying of the flood basin into the Gulf. This would have propelled both the waters and the Ark northward.

For the mega-flood to occur in Mesopotamia at all, the Gulf exit would have had to have been blocked in some way, wherever the water originated from.

That would have to be a strong wind to blow all that water (from the Mesopotamia) to the north... I don't know about that one... If the flood originated to the north around Mount Ararat and the Black and Caspian seas where there was an abundance of water, it could have then flowed downward to the Mesopotamia Plains. Again, this is just speculation...

[Fortigurn]

I'm an OEC, so it's not the number of years which is the issue. I'm happy with the idea that humans have been around for thousands of years.

I know you are... Me too... I've been enjoying this discussion and I hope you are too. I'm not offended at all by your questions. They are good ones..

Thanks, I'm enjoying it too.

The physical evidence you've provided demonstrates that humans have been around for thousands of years, and I agree. What I need to see is evidence that Adam and Eve were in fact th first of those humans.

I think they are.. But how are we going to trace that being so long ago? I don't really know yet. I'm still reading some of Dr. Ross's books, maybe we will stumble over it.. We are still trying to find physical evidence for Adam and Eve today, so I don't think adding more years to this would change anything...

I believe the Bible provides clear evidence that there were humans contemporaneous with the covenant community of Adam and Eve. Thus Adam and Eve were not the first human beings ever created.

But is it a common feature of genealogies to skip hundreds or thousands of years? When we read the genealogies at face value, we reach Noah's flood at around 2,900 BC. This suggests that the genealogies should be read at face value.

Yes, but then again if we compare the genealogies from the old and new testaments they seem to say otherwise..

This tells us that the New Testament genealogies are being selective, not the Old Testament genealogies.

Ok, so the flood dates to about 2,900 BC. Where does that leave the genealogies?

I see you are going off your powerpoint slide.. I don't think it does date to 2,900 BC based on this evidence... It's hard to say since the genealogies seem to be incomplete... While 100,000 years may be a stretch, 50,000 to 10,000 years may sound reasonable..

Ok, so that means we're back to the idea of the 2,900 BC flood taking place and being completely unnoticed by the Bible. So which Biblical events were contemporary with 2,900 BC? Doesn't that leave Abraham underwater?

That would have to be a strong wind to blow all that water (from the Mesopotamia) to the north... I don't know about that one... If the flood originated to the north around Mount Ararat and the Black and Caspian seas where there was an abundance of water, it could have then flowed downward to the Mesopotamia Plains.

That a mega-flood took place in 2,900 BC in the Mesopotamian flood basin is not under dispute. The very fact that it did means that the southern basin exit was blocked somehow, and wind is the most likely candidate.

[godslove39]

I think the evidence shows that the bible could have very well ment local flood which is good enough for me. For once we have the bible and science coming together on something... sorta.

[Gman]

I believe the Bible provides clear evidence that there were humans contemporaneous with the covenant community of Adam and Eve. Thus Adam and Eve were not the first human beings ever created.

I think I know what you are talking about here being that Adam and Eve was the start of the Jewish race in Genesis 2:7-22, while the first human race was started in Genesis 1:27.. Correct? Can you tell me the timeline you see for this first human race? I don't know about this.. It is possible, I'm undecided about it.. I believe those at "the Shepperd's Chapel" believe in this separate Jewish race theory.

This tells us that the New Testament genealogies are being selective, not the Old Testament genealogies.

Yes, but there are also gaps in the OT as well. This is a quote from Puritan Lad earlier...

In fact most geneologies in the Bible have purposes other then just an overview of human history. Consider the gaps in the Chronolgy of Ezra...

Ezra 7:1-5 - Aaron, Eleazar, Phineas, Abishua, Bukki, Uzzi, Zerahiah, Meraioth, Azariah, Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok, Shallum, Hilkiah, Azariah, Seraiah.

Compare with...

1 Chronicles 6:3-14 - Aaron, Eleazar, Phineas, Abishua, Bukki, Uzzi, Zerahiah, Meraioth, Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok, Ahimaaz, Azariah, Johanan, Azariah, Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok, Shallum, Hilkiah, Azariah, Seraiah, Ezra.

Ok, so that means we're back to the idea of the 2,900 BC flood taking place and being completely unnoticed by the Bible. So which Biblical events were contemporary with 2,900 BC? Doesn't that leave Abraham underwater?

I don't see how a local flood in 2,900 BC stacks up... We find that there was human life in various places in the world well before this time period, (like in Africa).

That a mega-flood took place in 2,900 BC in the Mesopotamian flood basin is not under dispute. The very fact that it did means that the southern basin exit was blocked somehow, and wind is the most likely candidate.

I'm looking again at your powerpoint slide.. This seems like the work of one man called "Dr. Helmut Brückner", can you show me where this is the accepted dateline by mainline Christianity? Thank you... Perhaps the young earth creationists (YEC) would buy it since it is more in their time frame..

Also I noticed that this date is based on the epic of Gilgamesh and the others around there in Sumeria.. While these dates for the epics are correct, there is still much debate that these stories were taken from much earlier stories...

I will post about the flood layer deposits there later.. I remember problems with it earlier..

Take care...

[Fortigurn]

I think I know what you are talking about here being that Adam and Eve was the start of the Jewish race in Genesis 2:7-22, while the first human race was started in Genesis 1:27.. Correct? Can you tell me the timeline you see for this first human race? I don't know about this.. It is possible, I'm undecided about it.. I believe those at "the Shepperd's Chapel" believe in this separate Jewish race theory.

Not at all. There was no 'Jewish race' until the tribe of Judah (and even then it wasn't a 'race', it was a tribe). The tribal name of Judah gave rise to the name 'Jew' which came to be used of all the Hebrews, but there wasn't even a single Hebrew alive until Abraham 'crossed over' the Euphrates.

I'm talking about where Cain found his wife.

Yes, but there are also gaps in the OT as well. This is a quote from Puritan Lad earlier...

In fact most geneologies in the Bible have purposes other then just an overview of human history. Consider the gaps in the Chronolgy of Ezra...

Ezra 7:1-5 - Aaron, Eleazar, Phineas, Abishua, Bukki, Uzzi, Zerahiah, Meraioth, Azariah, Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok, Shallum, Hilkiah, Azariah, Seraiah.

Compare with...

1 Chronicles 6:3-14 - Aaron, Eleazar, Phineas, Abishua, Bukki, Uzzi, Zerahiah, Meraioth, Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok, Ahimaaz, Azariah, Johanan, Azariah, Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok, Shallum, Hilkiah, Azariah, Seraiah, Ezra.

But you haven't actually addressed the Genesis 5 genealogies. We can see that Ezra's has gaps by comparing it with 1 Chronicles 6, but where are the gaps to be found in the Genesis 5 genealogies?

Where in fact is the Biblical evidence for over 30,000 years of gaps in Genesis 5? Why do the genealogies, when added up, correctly identify a 2,900 BC flood which actually happened at that date?

I don't see how a local flood in 2,900 BC stacks up...

Do you mean you don't think it took place, or that you don't believe in a local flood?

We find that there was human life in various places in the world well before this time period, (like in Africa).

I agree. I don't think that the Genesis flood was intended to kill everyone on the planet.

I'm looking again at your powerpoint slide.. This seems like the work of one man called "Dr. Helmut Brückner", can you show me where this is the accepted dateline by mainline Christianity?

It's not actually the work of one man, I quoted two different sources, both secular. That there was a 2,900 BC mega-flood in Mesopotamia is not a matter of dispute.

The date most frequently given by 'mainline Christianity' for the Genesis flood is somewhere between 2,500 and 2,300 BC, which isn't that far off the 29,00 BC date, but certainly nowhere near 30,000 years ago.

Note that Eusebius' date is within 2,900BC, and not only that he cites the Babylonian flood story (preserving the Epic of Gilgamesh account), as evidence that the flood genuinely took place and was recorded in history.

Thank you... Perhaps the young earth creationists (YEC) would buy it since it is more in their time frame..

I don't think they would like it, because they tend to be global flood people.

Also I noticed that this date is based on the epic of Gilgamesh and the others around there in Sumeria.. While these dates for the epics are correct, there is still much debate that these stories were taken from much earlier stories...

The date is not based on those epics. The date is based on the geological evidence. The Epic of Gilgamesh did not originally contain a flood narrative. The flood narrative in the Epic of Gilgamesh was inserted into the Epic in the 7th century, and was an Assyrian copy of the earlier Akkadian Atrahasis Epic.

The Sumerian Enuma Elish (containing a flood narrative), and the Atrahasis Epic (also a flood story), both date no earlier than around 1,600 BC. They certainly record the 2,900 BC mega-flood.

I will post about the flood layer deposits there later.. I remember problems with it earlier..

Make sure you read the modern research, not merely the criticism of Woolley's findings.