Jonathan Sarfati's Biblical Flood Overview
Having discussed John Baumgardner's rapid subduction model, Walt Brown's hydroplate hypothesis, Tas Walker's Biblical Geology chart and several other scientist's with information that concerns the Biblical Flood, it makes sense to present Dr. Sarfati's overview of the subject.
When studying origins, there is no time machine sitting in the corner that can take us on a journey back to the Beginning. You cannot run tests on the past. You cannot therefore prove anything with absolute certainty about the past, you can only make observations of things in existence now and gather all the information available about the past you can get your hands on and then try to put a cohesive hypothesis together that can build a narrative about the past that could have provided the present that we now can observe and test.
Today there is a myth that is commonly believed and deliberately spread by propagandists that evolution is an established scientific fact. Actually the entire hypothesis cannot withstand scrutiny. Nevertheless the true believers in the concept, a group I refer to as Darwinists, continue to believe in a failed hypothesis because of metaphysical reasons.
All scientists study the evidence but they all begin with a point of view, a worldview, and those who are true believers in Naturalism cannot allow themselves to believe in God and therefore they refuse to even consider evidence that kneecaps their pet hypothesis. But let's forget them and assume that you are willing to at least consider the idea that God is the Creator and therefore the Bible does help us come up with a reasonable explanation for the world we observe today. Cue Dr. Jonathan Sarfati:
The Bible, as God’s written word, should be non-negotiable. Its teachings
are propositional truth, and must be the foundation for all our teachings, including
about the Flood. This applies not only to explicit statements, but to anything logically
deducible from these statements. In fact, Jesus Himself endorsed the Flood as a real event, the Ark as a real ship,
and Noah as a real person (Luke 17:26–27), so how can any of His professing followers
deny it?
But where the Bible is genuinely silent, we are free to use science to help build models to help elucidate the clear teachings of Scripture. But these models are just man-made—they must never be given the same authority as Scripture. In any case, science is always changing, so being married to a model today will probably result in being widowed tomorrow. Worse, if the Bible is too tied up with a model later discarded, many will think that the Bible itself was refuted (cf. the church’s adoption of Aristotelian cosmology v Galileo).
To read the entire article, click here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don't be misled. Every hypothesis about the origin of the Universe, of the Solar System, of life, of time, of information, all of them begin with a worldview as a basis and continue on from there. Darwinists smugly claim that Young Earth Creationists simply say that "God did it" but that is not true. There are years of research into the scientific evidence that supports a created and designed Universe and Creation Science is all about HOW God did it and not whether He did. Darwinism just says "Nothing did it" and depend upon random chance to create all things, in violation of several scientific laws and certainly contrary to logic. Above the gate to Darwinism should hang a sign that says, "Abandon logic, all ye who enter here!"
I am not simply making baseless assertions, I am happily presenting eight plus years of Darwinist commenters who have failed miserably to give a scientific basis for their assertions, and therefore I give them their god - *Poof* and publicize their failure to make coherent arguments to back up their claims. Darwinists cannot explain where existence or life or information came from other than to say that, since they are here, they had to have happened! Yes, we have a Universe and a Solar System and laws of nature and life and information. But the evidence we find as we learn more about both organisms and the Universe supports creation ex nihilo by God rather than some kind of uncaused random series of events. In order to have a Universe, you must have existence and that just doesn't hang on racks at the drugstore.
The Bible is evidence, it is the history of early mankind and includes a narrative describing the creation of the Universe. The descriptions are specific but also quite general, so that a logical man can begin with God created and then begin to determine what God has made and how to use it to benefit mankind as well as try to figure out as many specifics as possible that could fit the Biblical account and also match what we know now about scientific laws. To create everything required miracles performed by God. But miracles are rare events and God has assigned oversight of the planet and even the Universe to us under His command, if we are willing, and science is one way we can learn to use what God has created. Modern science is built on the backs of giants, and the vast majority of those giants were Christians or at least Theists. History tells us this is so.
Now it is time for the world of science to give up their Darwin toy and cast it aside, just as they did when they gave up their stuffed animals and baby blanket as small children and began to grow up. Darwinism is made up of make-believe stories and unscientific claptrap and no shortage of deliberate outright lies. It still rules in the classrooms of most schoolrooms and secular scientific institutions and, do their shame, even some so-called "Christian Evolutionists" like the bunch at BioLogos. Shame on them for straddling the fence, thus making everything they say and do of no worth at all. At least Richard Dawkins has the courage of his convictions and stands on the idea of no God and nothing creating everything and he'll tell you this at the top of his lungs. Not that he would dare debate Jonathan Sarfati. But he doesn't try to take both sides. Neither do I.
God created all things. There was a literal Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve, a literal Fall from grace and consequences that have continued from that day forward. There was a worldwide Flood and all races and nations are descended from Noah and his family. There was a Tower of Babel. There was Abraham and his offspring who eventually became slaves in Egypt There was a Moses and a Nation of Israel who were led out of Egypt and eventually back to the land given to Abraham's people by God Himself. There was a Messiah, Jesus Christ, who came to be The Lamb of God, the Son of God Who lived a perfect life and suffered and died while taking all the sins of mankind upon Himself and becoming our Atonement and way back to relationship with God.
Christianity and Naturalism are both faith positions. Creationism and Darwinism are both built on a foundation of faith. Choose one.
When studying origins, there is no time machine sitting in the corner that can take us on a journey back to the Beginning. You cannot run tests on the past. You cannot therefore prove anything with absolute certainty about the past, you can only make observations of things in existence now and gather all the information available about the past you can get your hands on and then try to put a cohesive hypothesis together that can build a narrative about the past that could have provided the present that we now can observe and test.
Today there is a myth that is commonly believed and deliberately spread by propagandists that evolution is an established scientific fact. Actually the entire hypothesis cannot withstand scrutiny. Nevertheless the true believers in the concept, a group I refer to as Darwinists, continue to believe in a failed hypothesis because of metaphysical reasons.
All scientists study the evidence but they all begin with a point of view, a worldview, and those who are true believers in Naturalism cannot allow themselves to believe in God and therefore they refuse to even consider evidence that kneecaps their pet hypothesis. But let's forget them and assume that you are willing to at least consider the idea that God is the Creator and therefore the Bible does help us come up with a reasonable explanation for the world we observe today. Cue Dr. Jonathan Sarfati:
Flood models and biblical realism
Biblical creationists by definition believe in a globe-covering flood. But how this
occurred has been a matter of intense debate within the creationist geologist community.
Some general observations can be made from a theological, philosophic and scientific
perspective.
Hold the Bible strongly; hold models loosely
But where the Bible is genuinely silent, we are free to use science to help build models to help elucidate the clear teachings of Scripture. But these models are just man-made—they must never be given the same authority as Scripture. In any case, science is always changing, so being married to a model today will probably result in being widowed tomorrow. Worse, if the Bible is too tied up with a model later discarded, many will think that the Bible itself was refuted (cf. the church’s adoption of Aristotelian cosmology v Galileo).
To read the entire article, click here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don't be misled. Every hypothesis about the origin of the Universe, of the Solar System, of life, of time, of information, all of them begin with a worldview as a basis and continue on from there. Darwinists smugly claim that Young Earth Creationists simply say that "God did it" but that is not true. There are years of research into the scientific evidence that supports a created and designed Universe and Creation Science is all about HOW God did it and not whether He did. Darwinism just says "Nothing did it" and depend upon random chance to create all things, in violation of several scientific laws and certainly contrary to logic. Above the gate to Darwinism should hang a sign that says, "Abandon logic, all ye who enter here!"
I am not simply making baseless assertions, I am happily presenting eight plus years of Darwinist commenters who have failed miserably to give a scientific basis for their assertions, and therefore I give them their god - *Poof* and publicize their failure to make coherent arguments to back up their claims. Darwinists cannot explain where existence or life or information came from other than to say that, since they are here, they had to have happened! Yes, we have a Universe and a Solar System and laws of nature and life and information. But the evidence we find as we learn more about both organisms and the Universe supports creation ex nihilo by God rather than some kind of uncaused random series of events. In order to have a Universe, you must have existence and that just doesn't hang on racks at the drugstore.
The Bible is evidence, it is the history of early mankind and includes a narrative describing the creation of the Universe. The descriptions are specific but also quite general, so that a logical man can begin with God created and then begin to determine what God has made and how to use it to benefit mankind as well as try to figure out as many specifics as possible that could fit the Biblical account and also match what we know now about scientific laws. To create everything required miracles performed by God. But miracles are rare events and God has assigned oversight of the planet and even the Universe to us under His command, if we are willing, and science is one way we can learn to use what God has created. Modern science is built on the backs of giants, and the vast majority of those giants were Christians or at least Theists. History tells us this is so.
Now it is time for the world of science to give up their Darwin toy and cast it aside, just as they did when they gave up their stuffed animals and baby blanket as small children and began to grow up. Darwinism is made up of make-believe stories and unscientific claptrap and no shortage of deliberate outright lies. It still rules in the classrooms of most schoolrooms and secular scientific institutions and, do their shame, even some so-called "Christian Evolutionists" like the bunch at BioLogos. Shame on them for straddling the fence, thus making everything they say and do of no worth at all. At least Richard Dawkins has the courage of his convictions and stands on the idea of no God and nothing creating everything and he'll tell you this at the top of his lungs. Not that he would dare debate Jonathan Sarfati. But he doesn't try to take both sides. Neither do I.
God created all things. There was a literal Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve, a literal Fall from grace and consequences that have continued from that day forward. There was a worldwide Flood and all races and nations are descended from Noah and his family. There was a Tower of Babel. There was Abraham and his offspring who eventually became slaves in Egypt There was a Moses and a Nation of Israel who were led out of Egypt and eventually back to the land given to Abraham's people by God Himself. There was a Messiah, Jesus Christ, who came to be The Lamb of God, the Son of God Who lived a perfect life and suffered and died while taking all the sins of mankind upon Himself and becoming our Atonement and way back to relationship with God.
Christianity and Naturalism are both faith positions. Creationism and Darwinism are both built on a foundation of faith. Choose one.