Church Essay Contradicts The Global Flood Theory

[Tiki]

Evidences against a Global Flood 

 

Scientific Evidence

Tree ring records go back more than 10,000 years, with no evidence of a catastrophe during that time

Why are geological eras consistent worldwide? How do you explain worldwide agreement between "apparent" geological eras and several different (independent) radiometric and nonradiometric dating methods?

and many other scientific evidences. 

 

Historical Evidence 

We can construct reliable chronologies for near Eastern history, particularly for Egypt, from many kinds of records from the literate cultures in the near East. These records are independent of, but supported by, dating methods such as dendrochronology and carbon-14. The building of the first temple can be dated to 950 B.C. +/- some small delta, placing the Flood around 2250 B.C. Unfortunately, the Egyptians (among others) have written records dating well back before 2250 B.C. (

 

Archaeological evidence

The Göbekli Tepe was built about 11,000 years ago 

 

Mathematical evidence

How did all the animals fit? If there were only about 2,000 kinds of animals (like AnswersinGenesis claims), why is there is no evidence that Super fast evolution happened after the flood. Super fast Evolution has never been observed or documented, there is no scientific evidence for that. 

 

A local flood is much better, and "Earth" in the scriptures means land or region  

 

The scriptures 

 

3 Nephi 9:11 And it came to pass that there was a voice heard among all the inhabitants of the earth, upon all the face of this land, crying:

Helaman 14:27 "that darkness should cover the face of the whole earth for the space of three days"

Alma 36:7 "whole earth did tremble beneath our fee" 

3 Nephi 1:17 "all the people upon the face of the whole earth from the west to the east, both in the land north and in the land south, were so exceedingly astonished"

Tree ring dating has not been considered accurate:

"For the entire period of a tree's life, a year-by-year record or ring pattern is formed that reflects the climatic conditions in which the tree grew. Adequate moisture and a long growing season result in a wide ring. A drought year may result in a very narrow one. Alternating poor and favorable conditions, such as mid summer droughts, can result in several rings forming in a given year."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_ring#Growth_rings

Your other points are dating errors done by men and your private interpretation of the scriptures.

[bcuzbcuz]

Tree ring dating has not been considered accurate:

"For the entire period of a tree's life, a year-by-year record or ring pattern is formed that reflects the climatic conditions in which the tree grew. Adequate moisture and a long growing season result in a wide ring. A drought year may result in a very narrow one. Alternating poor and favorable conditions, such as mid summer droughts, can result in several rings forming in a given year."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_ring#Growth_rings

Your other points are dating errors done by men and your private interpretation of the scriptures.

Ok, in a 10,000 year growth cycle, you can find one year of variation. I'll give you four thousand years of growth variation.....however, you'd be hard pressed to find 5, because a tree makes one ring of growth each year. Prove it wrong. Go ahead, prove it wrong for five years, within an one hundred year period. 10,000 years, cut back to 9000 years, 8000 years...you'll find several resources that prove parallel growth rings.... You still end up with 8000+ years.

Then when you step outsde of growth rings, you'll find other resources that fit for the next 50,000 years. Find the error in the counting there and take away 4000 years, add it all up.

It still doesn't add up to 6000 years. You're playing penny ante in multi-million year game.

Good luck.

[MormonFreeThinker]

Tree ring dating has not been considered accurate:

"For the entire period of a tree's life, a year-by-year record or ring pattern is formed that reflects the climatic conditions in which the tree grew. Adequate moisture and a long growing season result in a wide ring. A drought year may result in a very narrow one. Alternating poor and favorable conditions, such as mid summer droughts, can result in several rings forming in a given year."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_ring#Growth_rings

Your other points are dating errors done by men and your private interpretation of the scriptures.

 

How do you know that the planet mars goes around the sun? How do you know the war of 1812 happened? Yes, scientists are not perfect, but the evidences for Evolution and the evidences against a Global FLood are very powerful .

"in a given year"

So you think that scientists just make crazy guesses? You know more than them? Of course they know that climate affects the number of rings, they take that into account. 

 

Elder UCHTDORF said, 

"scientists can look at the rings of trees and make educated guesses about climate and growing conditions hundreds and even thousands of years ago. One of the things we learn from studying the growth of trees is that during seasons when conditions are ideal, trees grow at a normal rate. However, during seasons when growing conditions are not ideal, trees slow down their growth and devote their energy to the basic elements necessary for survival." 

 

He said educated guesses about the climate, not educated guesses about the number of years ago. 

Edited May 3, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[ERayR]

See the Bible Chronology, what happened before the tower of Babel? 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bible-chron?lang=eng

 

Notice how the essay promotes a scientific theory, and does not say its false. 

 

"Scientists theorize that in an era that predated Book of Mormon accounts, a relatively small group of people migrated from northeast Asia to the Americas by way of a land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska" 

 

Later, the essay quotes President Ivins to open that possibility  

 

"At the April 1929 general conference, President Anthony W. Ivins of the First Presidency cautioned: “We must be careful in the conclusions that we reach. The Book of Mormon … does not tell us that there was no one here before them [the peoples it describes]. It does not tell us that people did not come after.”" 

 

So if people migrated to the Americas before the Jaradites, then it means that there was no Global Flood. The essay was approved by the First Presidency. 

 

https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-and-dna-studies?lang=eng

 

You are reading more from that than I can find.  To bolster your own point of view you make a lot of, IMO, unwarranted assumptions.

[ERayR]

Noah is not a new Gospel Topic essay,  so we don't if it is approved by the first presidency? Where is the "Thank you" sentence?

All already proved the "whole Earth" in the Book of Mormon means all the land, not the entire planet.

 

 

 

The church probably does not have an official position, but when has the church published a lie without saying that it is "false" or  "a theory of men" or "it's not true"

The Gospel Topic article is open to the theory that people came to the continent before the Jaradites

"The Global Flood is established, published and official LDS doctrine"

Official statement please

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

Remember the Book of Mormon intruduction? "Principle ancestors" If that was not a mistake, why did they change it?

 

 

See my above post.

[ERayR]

"article mentions that scientists have theories and thats it."

But why didn't the article clarify? Why didn't it say "Its just a theory" or "its an unproven theory" or "a lie"

When has the church published a false theory without condemning it? 

 

So that you can go wild with your extrapolations.

 

What about Elder Anthony W. Ivins? HE said, "does not tell us that there was no one here before"

By the way, Ugo Perego believes in a local flood. 

 

Good for Brother Ugo Perego but the last time I looked he was not one of the general authorities.

 

"the CFR"

What is that? 

[MormonFreeThinker]

You are reading more from that than I can find.  To bolster your own point of view you make a lot of, IMO, unwarranted assumptions.

 

See the video, and try to debunk it.

 

[ERayR]

Sounds like global warming to me.

 

Hey, just because we haven't discovered ancient SUVs yet, doesn't mean it isn't true!

 

There are some ancient literary works out of India that describes them.  Some were called vimana.

[ERayR]

Then one would expect evidence in Egypt to back up such a statement. There is none. Egypt existed before and after the so-called timeline for Noah's flood, without the slightest evidence of having ever disappeared  under water. You need more than a one liner from scripture to prove your statement.

 

There is a lot of ancient beaches lying around.  It is called sand.

[ERayR]

I've known more than one A$$ that talks.

 

You shouldn't leave yourself open like that.  The temptation is almost too much to resist.

[ERayR]

Ok, in a 10,000 year growth cycle, you can find one year of variation. I'll give you four thousand years of growth variation.....however, you'd be hard pressed to find 5, because a tree makes one ring of growth each year. Prove it wrong. Go ahead, prove it wrong for five years, within an one hundred year period. 10,000 years, cut back to 9000 years, 8000 years...you'll find several resources that prove parallel growth rings.... You still end up with 8000+ years.

Then when you step outsde of growth rings, you'll find other resources that fit for the next 50,000 years. Find the error in the counting there and take away 4000 years, add it all up.

It still doesn't add up to 6000 years. You're playing penny ante in multi-million year game.

Good luck.

 

 

Just prove it neener neener

[ERayR]

See the video, and try to debunk it.

 

 

 

Please address the topic I posted on.  You linked to an essay and said "Church Essay Contradicts The Global Flood Theory".  My post was to comment that you had read too much from the essay.  You rebut by linking to a video and ask me to prove it wrong.

 

Now lets get back on topic and this time I will ask you to show me where the essay contradicts the global flood.  I think I will make it a formal CFR.

[MormonFreeThinker]

Please address the topic I posted on.  You linked to an essay and said "Church Essay Contradicts The Global Flood Theory".  My post was to comment that you had read too much from the essay.  You rebut by linking to a video and ask me to prove it wrong.

 

Now lets get back on topic and this time I will ask you to show me where the essay contradicts the global flood.  I think I will make it a formal CFR.

 

"My point was" 

Okay, Ugo Perego's studies contributed to the Book of Mormon and DNA studies article. See resources 2, 4, 15 

#2 "For more on the relationship of DNA studies and the Book of Mormon generally see Ugo A. Perego"

 

Ugo doesn't believe in a Global Flood, but he believes that humans migrated to the Americas thousands of years before the Jaradites. 

 

"where the essay contradicts the global flood"

The possibility that people migrated to the Americas before the Jaradites contradicts the Global Flood, I said the possibility. 

Edited May 4, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[ERayR]

"My point was" 

Okay, Ugo Perego's studies contributed to the Book of Mormon and DNA studies article. See resources 2, 4, 15 

#2 "For more on the relationship of DNA studies and the Book of Mormon generally see Ugo A. Perego"

 

Ugo doesn't believe in a Global Flood, but he believes that humans migrated to the Americas thousands of years before the Jaradites. 

 

You are still dancing and evading my CFR.  Please read it again and address it directly.

[MormonFreeThinker]

You are still dancing and evading my CFR.  Please read it again and address it directly.

 

"where the essay contradicts the global flood". 

The possibility that people migrated to the Americas before the Jaradites contradicts the Global Flood, I said the possibility. 

The article of the church opens that idea, it opens that possibility. If that possibility is true, then there was no Global Flood.

[Rivers]

The church essay doesn't just contradictr a global flood.  It also contradicts an Adam and Eve being the first parents living in around 4000 B.C.

[Bikeemikey]

The church essay doesn't just contradictr a global flood. It also contradicts an Adam and Eve being the first parents living in around 4000 B.C.

Cool.

[MormonFreeThinker]

I do not agree with some of the arguments found in the Genesis 1 -2 Chapter of the Old Testament student manual, but I do agree with this theory, manuals says, "then the apparent conflict between the scriptures and much of the evidence seen by science as supporting a very old age for the earth is easily resolved. Each era or day of creation could have lasted for millions or even hundreds of millions of our years, and uniformitarianism could be accepted without any problem"

https://www.lds.org/manual/old-testament-student-manual-genesis-2-samuel/genesis-1-2-the-creation?lang=eng

 

It also says, "the evidence for longer processes involved in the Creation is substantial."

https://www.lds.org/manual/old-testament-student-manual-genesis-2-samuel/genesis-1-2-the-creation?lang=eng

 

So the manual clearly states that "much of the evidence seen by science as supporting a very old age for the earth" 

The truth is that "much of the" same "evidence" also contradicts a Global Flood. 

 

For example 

 

Edited May 5, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[Rodeo]

"Not everyone throughout the modern world, however, accepts the story of Noah and the Flood. Many totally disbelieve the story, seeing it as a simple myth or fiction. Typical of some modern scholars, one author recently discounted the events of the Flood by using such terms as “implausible,” “unacceptable,” and “impossible”; he stated that believers who would hope to provide geologic or other evidence regarding the historicity of the Flood “can be given no assurance that their effort, however sustained, will be successful.”¹ Another author titled his book The Noah’s Ark Nonsense,² revealing his disbelief that the Flood actually took place.

Still other people accept parts of the Flood story, acknowledging that there may have been a local, charismatic preacher, such as Noah, and a localized flood that covered only a specific area of the world, such as the region of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers or perhaps even the whole of Mesopotamia. Yet these people do not believe in a worldwide or global flood. Both of these groups—those who totally deny the historicity of Noah and the Flood and those who accept parts of the story—are persuaded in their disbelief by the way they interpret modern science. They rely upon geological considerations and theories that postulate it would be impossible for a flood to cover earth’s highest mountains, that the geologic evidence (primarily in the fields of stratigraphy and sedimentation) does not indicate a worldwide flood occurred any time during the earth’s existence.

There is a third group of people—those who accept the literal message of the Bible regarding Noah, the ark, and the Deluge. Latter-day Saints belong to this group. In spite of the world’s arguments against the historicity of the Flood, and despite the supposed lack of geologic evidence, we Latter-day Saints believe that Noah was an actual man, a prophet of God, who preached repentance and raised a voice of warning, built an ark, gathered his family and a host of animals onto the ark, and floated safely away as waters covered the entire earth. We are assured that these events actually occurred by the multiple testimonies of God’s prophets."

 

Fromhttps://www.lds.org/ensign/1998/01/the-flood-and-the-tower-of-babel?lang=eng

[thesometimesaint]

This Latter-day Saint believes that Noah was an actual man, a prophet of God, who preached repentance and raised a voice of warning, built an ark, gathered his family and a host of animals onto the ark, and floated safely away as waters covered the area he saw.

[Rodeo]

During Noah’s time the earth was completely covered with water. This was the baptism of the earth and symbolized a cleansing (1 Pet. 3:20–21).https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/flood-at-noahs-time?lang=eng

 

Position of LDS

[thesometimesaint]

During Noah’s time the earth was completely covered with water. This was the baptism of the earth and symbolized a cleansing (1 Pet. 3:20–21).https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/flood-at-noahs-time?lang=eng

 

Position of LDS

 

There is absolutely no evidence for a Global Flood at anytime during man's existence on this planet, and plenty to refute it. The whole story can be dismissed as a series of supernatural miracles. There is no way to contradict such an argument. However, one must wonder about a God who reportedly does one thing and then arranges every bit of evidence to make it look like something else happened. It's entirely possible that a global flood occurred 4000 years ago or even last Thursday, and that God subsequently erased all the evidence, including our memories of it. But even if such stories are true, what's the point?

 

Of what need does an inanimate object need of baptism?

 

Correction, position of some LDS.

[MormonFreeThinker]

During Noah’s time the earth was completely covered with water. This was the baptism of the earth and symbolized a cleansing (1 Pet. 3:20–21).https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/flood-at-noahs-time?lang=eng

 

Position of LDS

 

1 Pet 3: 20 - 21 doesn't say the Earth was baptized, read it carefully. The Gospel Topics Noah article says

 

What is the symbolism of Noah and the flood?

 

God uses symbols to teach gospel truths. In the New Testament, Peter explained that the flood was a “like figure” or symbol of baptism (1 Peter 3:20–21). Just as the earth was immersed in water, so we must be baptized by water and by the Spirit before we can enter the celestial kingdom. Also, Noah himself was a symbol of Christ. It was necessary for any living creature who wished to be saved to come “unto Noah into the ark” (Genesis 7:9, 15).

https://www.lds.org/topics/noah?lang=eng

 

The Flood was only a symbol, not a real baptism, just like Noah is not Christ. 

Even if the Flood was a real baptism, it didn't need an ocean everywhere, just like it didn't need someone to submerge it in a baptismal font.

Edited May 5, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[bcuzbcuz]

"Not everyone throughout the modern world, however, accepts the story of Noah and the Flood. Many totally disbelieve the story, seeing it as a simple myth or fiction. Typical of some modern scholars, one author recently discounted the events of the Flood by using such terms as “implausible,” “unacceptable,” and “impossible”; he stated that believers who would hope to provide geologic or other evidence regarding the historicity of the Flood “can be given no assurance that their effort, however sustained, will be successful.”¹ Another author titled his book The Noah’s Ark Nonsense,² revealing his disbelief that the Flood actually took place.

Still other people accept parts of the Flood story, acknowledging that there may have been a local, charismatic preacher, such as Noah, and a localized flood that covered only a specific area of the world, such as the region of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers or perhaps even the whole of Mesopotamia. Yet these people do not believe in a worldwide or global flood. Both of these groups—those who totally deny the historicity of Noah and the Flood and those who accept parts of the story—are persuaded in their disbelief by the way they interpret modern science. They rely upon geological considerations and theories that postulate it would be impossible for a flood to cover earth’s highest mountains, that the geologic evidence (primarily in the fields of stratigraphy and sedimentation) does not indicate a worldwide flood occurred any time during the earth’s existence.

There is a third group of people—those who accept the literal message of the Bible regarding Noah, the ark, and the Deluge. Latter-day Saints belong to this group. In spite of the world’s arguments against the historicity of the Flood, and despite the supposed lack of geologic evidence, we Latter-day Saints believe that Noah was an actual man, a prophet of God, who preached repentance and raised a voice of warning, built an ark, gathered his family and a host of animals onto the ark, and floated safely away as waters covered the entire earth. We are assured that these events actually occurred by the multiple testimonies of God’s prophets."

 

Fromhttps://www.lds.org/ensign/1998/01/the-flood-and-the-tower-of-babel?lang=eng

Interesting. And just when did this flood occur? Are you willing to posit a date? Anything within a 1000 year +- will do.

[cinepro]

There is absolutely no evidence for a Global Flood at anytime during man's existence on this planet, and plenty to refute it. The whole story can be dismissed as a series of supernatural miracles. There is no way to contradict such an argument. However, one must wonder about a God who reportedly does one thing and then arranges every bit of evidence to make it look like something else happened. It's entirely possible that a global flood occurred 4000 years ago or even last Thursday, and that God subsequently erased all the evidence, including our memories of it. But even if such stories are true, what's the point?

 

Of what need does an inanimate object need of baptism?

 

Correction, position of some LDS.

 

 

The Earth isn't an inanimate object in LDS doctrine.  It has a spirit:

 

48 And it came to pass that Enoch looked upon the ^aearth; and he heard a voice from the bowels thereof, saying: Wo, wo is me, the mother of men; I am ^bpained, I am weary, because of the wickedness of my children. When shall I ^crest, and be ^dcleansed from the ^efilthiness which is gone forth out of me? When will my Creator sanctify me, that I may rest, and righteousness for a season abide upon my face?

 

49 And when Enoch heard the earth mourn, he wept, and cried unto the Lord, saying: O Lord, wilt thou not have compassion upon the earth? Wilt thou not bless the children of Noah?

 

50 And it came to pass that Enoch continued his cry unto the Lord, saying: I ask thee, O Lord, in the name of thine Only Begotten, even Jesus Christ, that thou wilt have mercy upon Noah and his seed, that the earth might never more be covered by the ^afloods.51 And the Lord could not withhold; and he ^acovenanted with Enoch, and sware unto him with an oath, that he would stay the ^bfloods; that he would call upon the children of Noah;

Edited May 5, 2014 by cinepro