Dealing with Apparent Conflicts Between Geology and the Genesis Flood

Who are you going to believe, the Bible or your own lying eyes? It seems like a tough decision at times. The problem gets worse when people are uneducated about the sciences, the Bible, and creation science. Appearances can be deceiving, so we will take a look at how what we see in geology can appear problematic.

Monument Valley, Arizona image credit: Freeimages / Enrico Nunziati

If you saddle up and ride to, say, Monument Valley and a creationist tells you about the Genesis Flood, you may want to ask, "How can that be?" And yet, in the middle of the desert we can see formations that are clearly the results of cataclysmic water rushing through. There are other areas of apparent conflict, but a proper understanding of Flood geology and errors inherent in the uniformitarian system can help things fall into place.

I had explained to the people who packed the auditorium in Bridgnorth, England, that the Bible records the true history of the universe. Thus, we should use the Bible as our starting point in science, especially sciences like geology that deal with Earth history.

‘I believe the Bible,’ my visitor said, ‘but how can we accept what it says when it contradicts scientific facts? It is clear from geology that the rocks did not all form in a worldwide Flood.’

‘What do you mean?’

‘I’m a lecturer in chemistry at university. My geological colleagues tell me that the area all around was once a desert. You can see the sand dunes in the cliffs. How could there have been a flood here when it was a huge desert?’

. . .

Anyone who takes the Bible seriously cannot escape the obvious—the Flood was global. My questioner now realized this and was concerned. How could there be a huge desert in England in the middle of a global flood?

You can read the rest by clicking on "Shifting sands — How do we handle conflicts between geology and the Bible?" For a related article, see "Have scientists proved that the earth is old?"