The Modern Creation Trilogy. Dr. Henry M. Morris
Читать онлайн книгу.
did not do anything of consequence, just oozing up over the mountains, then oozing down again, tranquilly. The great sedimentary rock beds of the earth, with their fossil graveyards, comprise the essential evidence for the geological ages, and they must somehow be left intact if the geological ages (and evolution!) are to be preserved. Therefore, the biblical record of the Flood must be vastly downgraded.
The fact is, however, that the Bible, God’s inspired and inerrant Word, records a global, world-destroying hydraulic cataclysm in the days of Noah. It will allow no other legitimate interpretation, as we shall now see.
The Local Flood Theory
The great Flood of Genesis 6–9 is of critical importance to the true understanding of earth history. It has been seen that sound biblical exegesis will not permit placing the geological ages either before or during the six days of creation. Neither can the six days of creation be interpreted as non-historical or allegorical. The only other alternative is to reject the standard system of geological ages altogether!
This is, of course, a drastic suggestion — orthodox geologists indeed reject it out of hand. However, there is no other alternative. If the Bible is the Word of God — and it is — and if Jesus Christ is the infallible and omniscient Creator — and He is — then it must be firmly believed that the world and all things in it were created in six natural days, and that the long geological ages of evolutionary history never really took place at all.
This position forces one to find another explanation of the great sedimentary rock beds of the earth’s crust, as well as the fossil record contained in them. All of the geological strata and formations, the great coal and oil deposits, the volcanic and glacial beds, the mountain ranges and geosynclines, and all the multitudinous phenomena of historical geology, interpreted for over a hundred years in terms of uniformity and evolution, must be re-evaluated in terms of the biblical framework of history. Furthermore, its integral association with the fossil record indicates that the whole geological column must have been formed after the fall of man. Fossils clearly speak of death, and the Scriptures teach plainly that, “by man came death” (1 Cor. 15:21).
The only possible explanation for the geological column and fossil record, consistent with Scripture, must therefore be sought in terms of the biblical deluge. And this tremendous worldwide cataclysm does provide a satisfactory framework within which to reinterpret these data.
If the Flood was really of the magnitude and intensity that the Bible indicates, then the entire case for evolution collapses. Evolution depends entirely on the fossil record as interpreted in terms of vast geological ages. If these did not take place, evolution is impossible.
It is not surprising, therefore, that orthodox geologists strongly oppose the idea of a worldwide flood. In view of this intense and almost unanimous opposition, many evangelical Christians insist that Genesis be reinterpreted in terms of a local flood. It is actually very common, as could be expected, to find the local-flood view combined with either the day-age theory or the gap theory. Since both of the latter theories seek to salvage the geological ages, and since a worldwide flood would eliminate the entire basis for them, it is obvious that the concept of a global deluge is incompatible with either theory.
It is not easy in the academic world to maintain a so-called “flood theory of geology.” There are, no doubt, certain geological problems with such a position, but a far more real problem is the “flood” of scholarly wrath and ridicule that descends upon those who hold it — and that is no theory! The Genesis Flood, along with the record of recent creation which it supports, is the real crux of the conflict between the evolutionist and creationist cosmologies, and evolutionists invariably concentrate their strongest attacks at this point. Likewise, this is where Christians should also marshall their strongest and most vigorous campaign. Sad to say, their strategy until recent years has almost completely ignored this crucial issue.
If the system of flood geology can be established on a sound scientific basis, and be effectively promoted and publicized, then the entire evolutionary cosmology, at least in its present neo-Darwinian form, will collapse. This, in turn, would mean that nearly every anti-Christian system and movement (communism, racism, humanism, libertinism, behaviorism, and all the rest) would be deprived of their pseudo-intellectual foundation.
These are the stakes involved, and it is no wonder that evolutionists have so opposed the historical fact of the global cataclysm known as the Genesis Flood.
It almost seems frivolous to try to show that the Bible teaches a worldwide flood. This fact is so obvious in the mere reading of Genesis 6–9 that one who does not see it there will hardly be influenced by other reasoning. For the record, however, a few of the many irrefutable formal arguments are summarized below.
1. The Height and Duration of the Flood
The scriptural record says that the Flood covered the tops of the highest mountains (Gen. 7:19–20) and that this situation prevailed until ten months (Gen. 8:5) after the Flood began. If the mountains were the same elevation then as now, as the local-flood theory would imply, the waters were at least 17,000 feet high (Mount Ararat, on which the ark rested, reaches this altitude) for a period of at least nine months. To require such a condition to be a “local” flood imposes impossible hydraulic demands on the water involved. One has to assume a sort of egg-shaped flood three miles high!
2. The Need for an Ark
The requirement for Noah to build a gigantic barge to “keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth” (Gen. 7:3) was unnecessary, to say the least, if it were to be only a local flood. The ark had a carrying capacity at least equal to that of 522 standard railroad stock cars, as can be quickly calculated from its recorded dimensions (Gen. 6:15). This is more than twice as large as necessary to accommodate two of every species of known land animal that ever lived. If the Flood were only a local or regional flood, it would be folly to spend 120 years to prepare an ark large enough to carry animals from the whole world. Its size was absurdly out of proportion for a mere regional fauna. Moreover, the latter animals (as well as humans) could easily have escaped a local flood by the obvious expedient of migrating to higher ground elsewhere.
3. Destruction of the Earth
The biblical description of the unique and overwhelming physical aspects of the Flood precludes a mini-flood. God said, in fact, He was going to destroy the earth (Gen. 6:13). The 40-day downpour (the “windows” of heaven were literally “floodgates”), the simultaneous cleavage of the vast “fountains of the great deep” (Gen. 7:11), the absence of rain before the Flood (Gen. 2:5), the establishment of the rainbow after the Flood (Gen. 9:13), and the fact that the waters “overturned the earth” (Job 12:15) all are understandable only in terms of a unique worldwide cataclysm.
4. God’s Unbroken Promise
God’s unequivocal promise never again to send the Flood (Gen. 9:11) has been broken repeatedly if the Noachian flood were only a local flood. Therefore, the local-flood theory not only repudiates the plain meaning of the biblical record of the Flood, but even charges God with breaking His promises!
5. Testimony of Christ and the Apostles
The Lord Jesus Christ himself, as well as Peter (2 Pet. 2:5; 3:6) and the author of Hebrews, probably Paul (Heb. 11:7), confirmed that the Flood at least destroyed all mankind. Christ said, “the flood came, and destroyed them all” (Luke 17:27). The modern system of geology and archaeology, which the local-flood theory tries to accommodate, certainly includes a worldwide distribution of mankind long before any possible biblical date for the Flood. A flood that was anthropologically universal would certainly have to be geographically universal.
These and many other reasons that could be listed clearly prove that the biblical record teaches a worldwide flood. One could, in fact, prove this directly, merely by the experiment of a slow, thoughtful reading of Genesis 6–9, while trying to understand each verse as a description of a “local” flood. It will soon be realized what distortion of the plain sense of the inspired text this requires.1
The Tranquil Flood Theory
Strangely