Were We ALL Under Water?

In each of these two articles, the author examines the Great Flood of Noah's day in the Bible.  While both recognize that this flood had to have occurred, they take a distinctly separate stand on the magnitude of the catastrophe.


In the article from The Institute of Christian Research, the author argues for the idea that the Flood was a global one and that all corners of the earth were completely covered-- even the highest mountain peaks.  He uses Biblical testimonies to back up his point, citing the words of Jesus and Peter, while also using scientific evidence.


In the article from Biologos, the author makes the statement that the Flood was not, in fact, a worldwide one, but a local one.  In proving his point, this author uses the original text of Genesis to highlight word choice that point to a more local flood, confined to one region of the world.


Personally, I believe in a world wide Flood that God used to destroy the earth that had become wicked and broken his heart, so he could essentially start over with the one family--Noah's-- that he could find that still followed him.  In doing this, I believe that God told Noah of his plans: "I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it.  Everything on earth will perish." (Genesis 6:17)  God then instructed Noah to build the ark, a boat of immense proportions, to take two of every animal to be saved from the waters.


Now, one might argue that two of every kind of animal of the millions on the planet would not have fit on the ark, let alone the millions of undiscovered ones.  But we must remember, millions of species are marine animals, which would not have to have been on the ark to survive.  And with the cross-breeding and whatnot of today, there are probably millions of species here on earth today that were not around during Noah's time.


And how are we to explain the terrain of the whole earth today if the flood was not a world wide one? Take the Grand Canyon for instance.  Does a humongous ditch just appear? Or did some sort of huge inundation have to occur to carve such a masterpiece out to the earth's crust?  I choose to believe the latter.  And what about the marine fossils and sedimentary rock found near the summits of mountains?  Did those just happen to be there? Or were they carried there by billions and billions of gallons of water that covered the surface of the earth?  The second seems most logical to me.


All in all, there are pros and cons of each argument.  The Biologos people make a great point about the ancient Hebrew words used in the actual account, but geographic features of the earth, in my opinion, point to a different story.  The ICR people make great use of scientific logic, but I can see where some people would hesitate to believe in the possibility of a worldwide flood.




http://www.icr.org/article/why-christians-should-believe-global-flood/
http://biologos.org/questions/genesis-flood