It never ceases to amaze me the lengths some Christians will go to concede ground to Darwin. One claim made by such people is that Noah's flood was only a local event. But the scriptures militate against this idea. Whereas there are exactly zero places in scripture that suggest the flood could have been local, multiple scriptures tell us it was global.
One such example is Genesis 9:19, which says that the whole earth was populated from Noah's three sons. Now, if the flood was local, this makes no sense. So God wipes out a small locality of people in Turkey, there are entire continents left untouched. The only way the whole earth could be populated by just three men is if the rest of the human race went extinct.
Of course, there are far more explicit statements that prove the flood wasn't local. The fact that the flood covered the mountains (Genesis 7:20), the fact that God promised to never repeat such a flood (Genesis 9:15), the fact that Peter says that people will deliberately forget that the flood destroyed the whole earth (2 Peter 3:3-6), these are all examples of things that completely rule out the local flood. But this doesn't undermine the significance of the smaller things. The fact that the entire Bible is against the local flood view, and in favour of the view that the flood was a historical, global phenomenon forces every Christian to make a choice: God's word or man's. I refuse to add making the wrong choice on that dilemma to my long list of sins.
Comments