Waters of the Deep

http://biologos.org/blog/the-firmament-of-genesis-1-is-solid-but-thats-not-the-point

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
http://biologos.org/blog/the-firmament-of-genesis-1-is-solid-but-thats-not-the-point

This is an excellent article, thanks ATY.

Coming in very late in this thread I agree that whether this "water in the earth" supports the global flood or not is not the point. There are far bigger problems with a global flood.

For me, the first question that a proponent of such a flood would need to explain, is how the kangeroos (just as an example) got to and from the ark. It seems there are only three possibilities, each with its own momemtous problems:

1. They were not yet kangeroos, but proto-kangeroos which developed further along "their own kind" route after their return.

2. They crossed on land, which means Gondwanaland, which (even if it were recent) means a journey of many months through terrain often inhospitable and devoid of food.

3. They swam, or found another way of crossing the ocean.

I have not heard one good explanation of how and why certain animals, like lemurs and llamas who occur only in certain parts of the world, did not leave offspring behind in their journey through vast stretches of land to and from the ME.

Originally posted by CalJust
It seems there are only three possibilities, each with its own momemtous problems:

You forgot the most obvious one:
4. It was a miracle - and thus does not require explanation.

Of course this explanation somewhat ruins the attempts to find evidence for the flood and thus validate the Bible.

Nautiloids - Evidence for a Catastrophic Occurrence at the Grand Canyon

Maybe evidence for the worldwide flood of the Holy Bible

Originally posted by twhitehead
You forgot the most obvious one:
4. It was a miracle - and thus does not require explanation.

Of course this explanation somewhat ruins the attempts to find evidence [b]for the flood and thus validate the Bible.[/b]

That's right. The Holy Bible seems to say that God called the required animals to the ark.

In Genesis 7:9 the phrase "there went into the ark to Noah" implies God's help in getting the animals TO Noah so he could bring them into the ark as God commmaded Noah.

There is no explanation as to how each animal got to the areas that they are located today. But even secular scientists agree that the land masses were probably all connected together at one time. So the animals could have traveled under the direction of God into whatever area He wanted them to go.

Originally posted by RJHinds
That's right. The Holy Bible seems to say that God called the required animals to the ark.

In Genesis 7:9 the phrase [b] "there went into the ark to Noah" implies God's help in getting the animals TO Noah so he could bring them into the ark as God commmaded Noah.

There is no explanation as to how each animal got to the areas that they are ...[text shortened]... animals could have traveled under the direction of God into whatever area He wanted them to go.[/b]

So my question has always been, if this god wanted to off some nasty humans it didn't like, why go to all that trouble, kill ALL the land animals and such, just to get to those humans? If it is all powerful, all it would have had to do was wave it's rhetorical hands and zap, no more nasty humans, the planet doesn't have to undergo a catastrophe, the land animals all live and this god gets the job done with minimal effort.

Can't you see the problem here with such a scenario? The whole thing smacks of just some apocryphal tale designed to scare people into obedience, not some real event done by a real god.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So my question has always been, if this god wanted to off some nasty humans it didn't like, why go to all that trouble, kill ALL the land animals and such, just to get to those humans? If it is all powerful, all it would have had to do was wave it's rhetorical hands and zap, no more nasty humans, the planet doesn't have to undergo a catastrophe, the land an ...[text shortened]... apocryphal tale designed to scare people into obedience, not some real event done by a real god.

I believe God wants people who will love and obey Him willingly. God does not want to have unwilling servants. The Holy Bible compares God with a potter working on a masterpiece and reworking it until it is ready for the fire.

The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying: “Arise and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause you to hear My words.” Then I went down to the potter’s house, and there he was, making something at the wheel. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to make.

Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?” says the Lord.

(Jeremiah 18:1-6 NKJV)

Originally posted by RJHinds
I believe God wants people who will love and obey Him willingly. God does not want to have unwilling servants. The Holy Bible compares God with a potter working on a masterpiece and reworking it until it is ready for the fire.

[b]The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying: “Arise and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause you ...[text shortened]... of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?” says the Lord.

(Jeremiah 18:1-6 NKJV)[/b]

So the gist of all that is your god thinks nothing of destroying all the animals on Earth to get to a few bad humans. That alone says humans wrote that stuff because THEY would be the first ones to put themselves WAY above animals and would therefore be the first ones to think if they were all gone, no big deal.

But it IS a big deal, even if you equate animals to a much lower position than humans, they are TOTALLY needed for the ecology of the planet.

Without land animals, there would be no land ecology.

A god would know that instinctively and would never put the whole planet in danger like that.

It STINKS of human hands just writing the whole thing to bring fear into their subjects. No god needed for that.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So the gist of all that is your god thinks nothing of destroying all the animals on Earth to get to a few bad humans. That alone says humans wrote that stuff because THEY would be the first ones to put themselves WAY above animals and would therefore be the first ones to think if they were all gone, no big deal.

But it IS a big deal, even if you equate ...[text shortened]... an hands just writing the whole thing to bring fear into their subjects. No god needed for that.

You apparently missed that part about God saving all those land animals, but only eight humans. I think that means God knows the importance of land animals.