Opposing View – Noah’s Flood

G. C. Forsman

Certainly, most would argue that Noah’s flood was in fact global, and not local as Hugh Ross discusses in my previous post.  The video below discusses one such opposing view.  Listen for yourself and decide.  I encourage each and everyone of you to pull out your Bible and do the research yourself.  Remember, both my previous post on this topic, and this one, are opinions of men (scientific and Religious).  The truth of the matter is that God’s Word is the only truth on this matter.  It would seem that where the differences come in are in each man’s interpretation, and the assumptions these men make prior to beginning their analysis.  The real question is: Do these men search the scriptures to prove their theories, or do they allow the Bible to lead them to God’s truth?  Only God, and the leading of the Holy Spirit can bring us to the truth.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Opposing View – Noah’s Flood

  1. When Christians declare “I have the word of God, those other Christians don’t” it is no better than when atheists say, “we have reason, those other people don’t.”

    It doesn’t make the speaker look to good because it gives the impression of dogmatism, the willingness to name-call others, and dismissive attitude towards anyone who they disagree with.

    Not the best way to gain credibility.

  2. Sure: You say,
    “Do these men search the scriptures to prove their theories, or do they allow the Bible to lead them to God’s truth?”

    This is a false dichotomy. Basically, there is no reason (at least none that you present) that both cannot be true. Also, you have not actually quoted anything by Hugh Ross, RTB etc. There is little reason to believe (heh, no pun intended) that Hugh Ross and RTB hold to viewpoints you seem to be attributing to them. You have nice video, but it’s not published by Hugh Ross and his hostile to his views. This is a little bit like learning about the United States by listening to Iranian and North Korean news.

    The tenor of the video has the same “we got the Bible, they don’t” which is deceptively simplified and also leads me to believe that they are probably not presenting Hugh Ross’s views fairly.

    Do you want credibility? Then post links to article by Hugh Ross, RTB or anyone else. Demonstrate that you understand it, and explain why you think it is wrong.

    • Great points. The Hugh Ross Video was posted first in the preceding story (When was Noah’s Flood?) The story just prior to this one on the feed. There you will find Hugh Ross presenting his information. I purposely did not support one or the other in hopes to spur an interesting discussion. But since you asked, based on my studies I believe in this instance Hugh Ross is incorrect in his interpretation.

      “Now the flood was on the earth forty days. The waters increased and lifted up the ark, and it rose high above the earth. The waters prevailed and greatly increased on the earth, and the ark moved about on the surface of the waters. And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth, and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered.” (Genesis 7:17-19, NKJV)

      In addition to this quote from the Bible, there are flood stories in many cultures. If the flood was only local, it is doubtful that other cultures would report the same thing. I look forward to hearing from you again.

  3. magnificent issues altogether, you just received a brand new reader. What could you suggest in regards to your post that you made some days in the past? Any certain?

  4. Some really good information, Glad I discovered this. “I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning.” by Plato.

Comments are closed.