I spent 2 hours on a response to your post only to have it cancelled because it was too long. Maybe I'll take another whack at it later. Hans
Keep in mind that there a lot of Christians (like myself) who believe in a local flood. This is in harmony with the Bible, geological evidence and gets rid of all the difficulties that skeptics have with the global flood. I am pointing out that when you say that the Bible is errant based on the fact you can disprove a global flood really does nothing because a local flood has some evidence for it geologically and, as another poster pointed out, anthropologically. In other words, disproving a local flood will be quite impossible rendering your overall argument above ineffective...
No, it really could be about a flood in just the Mesopotamian region, which is where all of mankind was located at the time according to the Bible. And, again, this is the position of a lot of Christians. Flood Geology is a relatively new, even 20th century American phenomenon.
The Black Sea flood is proposed to have occured 5600 BC. Pottery was introduced in Japan in 10,000 BC. So, a local Black Sea high water episode will not satisfy Biblical requirements. You will need something considerably more expansive, to support inerrancy.
Sorry, I saw the same website that you cut and pasted from. Try using your own brain and think. I have read the scripture end to end. How about you? And the debates with people like you are farcical, because they somehow think their own excessively limited viewpoint enables them to comment on a book that was written particularly to prevent them from undersstanding "They will look an not see, they shall listen but not hear" "The preaching of the cross is foolishness to those that are perishing." I have had plenty of such "debates", and it is always sad, because their concept of an open mind, is to be a "skeptic" and cut and paste from websites instead of doing their own research. I have seen them all. My faith is not based on "proof". I have seen too much to know the truth, and see that people think they are self-clever about things they know nothing about.
In other words: In order to believe one must come to know God -- but in order to come to know God one must already believe! :eek:
My absolute confidence in the Bible's errancy is not squarely based on the flood. It is based on NUMEROUS errors. Noah's Ark was supposedly around 500 feet long. There have been over 500 species of dinosaurs alone that have been located. Plus all of the other animals, how did they all get into the ark? (Answer--there WAS no ark) Did he and others literally live HUNDREDS of years? Methuselah supposedly lived 969. Did he and other humans live to be 900 years? (Answer--Of course not.) According to Genesis 1, plants were created before the sun. Is this scientifically possible, since plants through photosynthesis derive life from the sun? (Answer--No. Bible's wrong again). Are bats birds? (Answer--Of course not. They're mammals. But Leviticus says they're birds. Gee, I wonder who's right there?) The Bible speaks literally of dragons, unicorns, and flying serpents. They must exist, right? (Answer--Of course not, despite what creationist/fed prisoner Kent Hovind says). I have about a hundred more errors on the top of my head (remember, I studied the Bible as a student at an evangelical university), but football is on. The Bible is not inerrant. It is a perfectly human book, filled with the errors that often appeared in a pre-scientific age. If you want to walk around ignorant, fine by me.