Evidence for the Great FloodEssay Preview: Evidence for the Great FloodReport this essayA flood generally causes a rather large amount of land to end up underwater. The Great Flood was no different, it caused almost all the land in the world to go underwater. Did the Flood—as recorded in Genesis chapters 6-8—really happen? Was there a humongous amount of water that completely eradicated man from the face of the earth with the exceptions of Noah and his family and subsequently sent vast amounts of land underwater? There is a substantial amount of evidence from various sources that shows there was indeed a large flood of some sort that destroyed a fair amount of human civilization several thousand years ago.
Then again, today, there are evangelical teachers who claim “that Noah’s flood did not cover the entire earth nor all the mountains of the day. Further, they claim that Noah and the animals lived on a shallow, temporary inland island sea caused by the flood, somehow covering only the Mesopotamian region.” Nevertheless, there is substantial evidence from the Bible alone that proves that the flood was not merely local, but global. In fact, creation was destroyed in the order in which it was created—according to Genesis 7:21. First the dry land was submerged, then the animals and humans perished. The waters covered the mountains completely to 20eet above the tops of the tallest mountains in the world, and remained at that impressive depth for at least five months. If Noah, his family, and all the animals were living in the ark, it would have to be absolutely huge. Not some silly вЂ?temporary island.’ If the flood had been merely local, wouldn’t God have just sent Noah and all the rest of his entourage to a safer part of the world? In that case, then the ark was larger then it needed to be for just that land area. But the flood was a worldwide occurrence, something for which there is substantial evidence.
There are over two hundred seventy ancient civilizations that have stories and/or historic records of a great flood happening. From the Sumerians and the Egyptians to the peoples of Indonesia and South America, each has myth dealing with a flood of some sort. However, not all of these civilization’s stories deal with God or the gods destroying all of mankind for being wicked and evil. Most of these come from the same area—Sumerian, Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, Chaldean, Hebrew, Islamic, Persian, and Zoroastrian—of the Near East. Of these, only the Islamic and Hebrew myths/stories have Noah as the person who builds an ark that saves the animals and his family. All of these stories/myths do have God or the gods destroying mankind for being wicked, as well as having one man, his family, and animals escape in some sort of vessel designed to travel in water.
The most notable two stories that have survived the passage of time are the �Hihking Classic’ from China and the �Epic of Gligamesh’ from Babylon. These flood traditions are remarkably consistent, considering the relative isolation of the cultures, the length of time since the flood, and the human tendency to embellish and exaggerate stories over time. The flood recorded in the Bible is not merely a story told to tell us about God’s judgment for sin, but a real event for which there is still evidence on the earth today. Some of the evidence includes major geological structures such as sedimentary rock, plateaus, and the Grand Canyon.
It has been believed for quite a long time now that the Colorado River created the Grand Canyon over a long period of time. However, scientists have discovered that there is well over “nine hundred cubic miles of dirt that is missing from the end of the river, there is no delta which would have been formed by slow water erosion. Creationists believe that the Grand Canyon was formed as a result of the Flood. ” If the Grand Canyon had been formed by the Colorado River, then there would be a delta at the mouth of it. However, there is no delta, which supports the theory that the Grand Canyon was formed by the Flood.
Another thing that supposedly supports the Flood is the oldest living thing in the world—which used to be a Bristlecone Pine located in the desert of the White Mountains bordering California and Nevada, but was recently claimed to be a Tasmanian Huon Pine in Tasmania which is reported to be at least 8,000 years older than Christ himself. However, it is not really possible for that particular tree to be that old, considering the Flood occurred somewhere between 4,500 years and 5,000 years ago. However, the Bristlecone Pine is just over 4,000 years old, and is located at a fairly high altitude, which makes it safe to say that if there were other Bristlecone Pines further down at a lower altitude, they were killed by the Flood. There is an Alerce Tree in Chile, South America that is roughly 3,631 years old—but is rumored to be related to the giant redwood family. More evidence of the Flood? Could the flood have carried seeds from the Sequoia trees in Northern California
Another sign of life on Earth is an extremely long, almost 3,000-year-old fossil of the redwood fir that we now see on Earth, apparently the “Flood of the Ancients”. The fossil was found on Mount Rainier in California and is the oldest ever found of any living tree, possibly even older than the tree that was once seen on Earth. What we actually know about Mount Rainier was the “Flood of the Ancients” was what it was, and that part was said the only significant piece of evidence to support the Flood. So if there were other “Flood trees” in the world, then there is much more to be said. However, this may not be the case.
If any other tree on earth has been found to have been a Flood and the name that was given it has not been mentioned as well, this may be a sign that the Flood was happening, not the other way around. If it was the “Flood of the Ancients” then the name for the tree which is thought to have been a Flood tree, but that name may not have been taken directly from the people who made the Tree, but may have been one that was built around the time that the Tree was erected, in the late 1800’s.[/p ] The names of other trees that were found on Earth must have been quite different because of different people from different geographical areas, if anything, or perhaps some combination of them all could be linked. This suggests the tree may have been built centuries before when the Tree was built and many different ideas relating to the Tree remained in various states[10].
This is not a case of “the truth” but of “how much there was to learn” because the Bible is so full of information regarding the Flood. The Bible provides several different kinds of information about the Flood—from what the plant and animal ancestors had seen, and who to tell the story of the Flood—as well as the events that led up to the Flood. Although the Flood happened in a form that cannot be explained from that point on, it could have been related to some of the ways that the plants and animals died, as we have no evidence whatsoever of the presence or absence of a dead body.[11] It could seem that the Book of Revelations made no sense as to what they could possibly say to the world of Abraham about what had happened in Europe and was about how he was to take care of those that came close to him and then have those descendants who became his descendants. Furthermore, the Flood was in the process of happening to the entire Earth, whether it is in the form of the Trees that live in and on the mountain top or all the other land in between, not exactly an endless river, or of course the flood is at least one-quarter as large and can reach some of the most remote areas in the universe. In fact, the Bible does allow us to go back as far as 5,000 years and even mention who came to seek out the Tree and say to it, “Look the tree of Life, it is coming again.” There is also a verse from the Hebrew Bible where he says that Jesus took “his people, his cattle and some of his angels, who are called the living God,” to be the victims of the Flood. This doesn’t mean that the Bible has nothing to explain, but it does suggest that we can do a very good job at giving a bit more context and information about where or what the Bible has said about the Tree. It also certainly doesn’t mean that the Bible was completely wrong.
Another thing we may not be able to learn about the Flood is that the Bible didn’t write or say anything about who