Evidence for God from Science

I know the article(the one on whether or not the flood was a local or global event) that was written on this website claims that 104 supports a local flood event, but I believe it's actually the opposite. Psalms 104 talks about the flood after land has already been formed, and how it covered the entirety of the Earth. I'm unsure how could this be construyed to mean anything else. Maybe I'm missing something thing here?

Bluejay4 wrote:I know the article(the one on whether or not the flood was a local or global event) that was written on this website claims that 104 supports a local flood event, but I believe it's actually the opposite. Psalms 104 talks about the flood after land has already been formed, and how it covered the entirety of the Earth. I'm unsure how could this be construyed to mean anything else. Maybe I'm missing something thing here?

As usual there is going to be different views however I believe the bible teaches a global flood in Noah's flood,however and I'm not trying to offend anybody but it is the way young earth creationists have taught it that so many people reject it. There are much,much better ways of making a case for Noah's flood that have been overlooked and one was a book that was forwarded by Albert einstien and yet it was ignored by YEC's in order to teach Noah's flood their way,also Gap Theorists do a much,much better job making a case for Noah's flood than YEC's have. I can't remember the name of the book forwarded by Albert Einstien but it made a strong case scientifically for a global flood. I'll have to see if I can find it. But there aremuch,much better ways to teach a global flood than the way YEC's have taught it. I'm not trying to offend young earth creationists just trying to be truthful.