Flood of Genesis
Noah
Hydroplate Theory
Why not allow scientific evaluations of differing theories of geology,
without dogmatic stipulations of conformity to uniformitarianism?
Criticisms of the belief in literal interpretation of the Flood of
Genesis depend on the philosophy of naturalism (commonly
portrayed as "science" in some developed nations). So what's
wrong with using an approach that is popular with many modern
scientists? Believe what you will, but that popular approach to
criticizing the creationist interpretation is not scientific; most
of it is political maneuvering for a particular philosophy: strict-
naturalism. Please consider the following points.
What is strict-naturalism philosophy? In biology it includes the
General Theory of Evolution; in popular geology (at least popular
in the twentieth century) it includes uniformitarianism. But its
essence includes rejection of any creative or judgmental God
who has actively created or destroyed the world. A Flood critic
who uses that approach dogmatically--that person can hardly
avoid introducing bias to his reasoning, for Genesis includes
both creative and destructive activities of God.
Can the reality of the Genesis account of the Flood of Noah be
evaluated objectively, scientifically? Yes, but only for the person
who can separate both the philosophy of scientists from scientific
data and the human traditions of religionists from scriptures.
Otherwise it's just the same philosophical debate between strict-
naturalists and strictly-traditional religionists.
Criticism of the Flood of Noah
Flood of Genesis Map
From The Center for Scientific Creation:
“. . . the earth has experienced a devastating,
worldwide flood, whose waters violently burst
forth from under earth’s crust. Standard ‘text-
book’ explanations for many of earth’s major
features are scientifically flawed. We can now
explain, using well-understood phenomena,
how this cataclysmic event rapidly formed so
many features. . . . far more catastrophic than
almost anyone has imagined. . . .”
“In the six hundredth year of Noah’s
life, in the second month, the seven-
teenth day of the month, the same
day were all the fountains of the
great deep broken up . . .”
(Genesis 7:11)
“And the waters prevailed exceedingly
upon the earth; and all the high hills
. . . were covered . . . the mountains
were covered.”
(Gen. 7:19-20)
The Hydroplate Theory may explain more things
than does the Plate Tectonics theory, in geology
Searching for Ropens and Finding God
with a few references to the Old Testa-
ment, including the Flood of Noah - also
the “fiery flying serpent,” which could
relate to the ropen of Papua New Guinea
Copyright 2006-2014 Jonathan David Whitcomb
A classic work of art: the animals disembarking from the Ark
Should not the worldwide Flood of
Genesis have caused many organisms
to have become fossilized? Of course.