Comments on “Exploring the Extent of the Flood: Part Two”

In Volume 1, No. 2 of New Reasons to Believe, Ross continues his explanation of why we should not believe the Bible when it says the flood covered the whole earth.  Ross presents Psalms 104 as a retelling of the creation story, particularly versus 5-9:Psa 104:5  He established the earth upon its foundations, So that it will not totter forever and ever.Psa 104:6  You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains.Psa 104:7  At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away.Psa 104:8  The mountains rose; the valleys sank down To the place which You established for them.Psa 104:9  You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth.We are again asked to commit the error of interpreting the Genesis account given by Moses in light of scripture written four hundred years later.   Without an agenda to fit the Bible into “Science”, we could just as easily say that verse 9 was written with regard to Noah’s flood waters not returning to cover the earth.Ross compounds the error by invoking several other later scriptures, including 2 Peter 2:5:

“…2 Peter 2:5 informs us that God brought the Flood upon the ‘world of the ungodly.’  If humanity had not yet migrated to all Earth’s continents, including Antarctica, Greenland, Australia, and North and South America, there would have been no apparent reason for God’s devastation to extend that far.”

Several logical disasters lurk in this statement.  First, Ross assumes the correctness of his argument to argue that his argument is correct.  He assumes that humanity had not migrated to all the earth, then tells us that since humanity had not migrated to all the earth, there was no need to wipe out all the earth.  I have no doubt that humanity had indeed migrated to all the earth.  But that leads us into Ross’ second error: he assumes many other things: billions of years, continental drift over billions of years, uniformitarianism, and the authority of the truth of Science over the Bible when he tells us that at the time of the flood the major continents were already in place on the earth.  Young earth creationists have long pointed out the evidence that Science is wrong on uniformitarianism, and that the continents could easily have drifted from an original single continent to their current locations in a very short time.  There is much evidence that this is indeed the case.  What does the Bible say about the continents?

Gen 10:25  Two sons were born to Eber; the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan.

The earth was divided into continents well after the flood, if “divided” really means divided.Finally Ross is arguing that a global flood makes God look inefficient.  If man had not spread over the whole earth (an assumption) then God didn’t really need to wipe out the whole earth, just the part Man was living in.  Ross will be in Heaven arguing with God that at the final judgment, since Man had not extended his range to the bottoms of the oceans, that there was no need to destroy the bottoms of the ocean when God destroys all creation with fire, as the Bible says He will.  I think it is more prudent to let God decide what he is going to destroy and how he is going to do it.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.