The Instigator
kohai
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points
The Contender
Mikeee
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points

Noah's flood of genesis is a historic event

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
kohai
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/30/2011 Category: Science
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,802 times Debate No: 18123
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (11)
Votes (5)

 

kohai

Con

DEFINITION

Noah's Flood: An "event" in history that was a world wide flood. This flood covered the entire earth in water. This debate is through a literal reading of Genesis.

Historical event: An event that actually happened.

BURDEN OF PROOF

It is my burden to show how a world wide flood like Noah would be impossible and historically unlikely. My opponent needs to prove it happened and it occurred.

8000 characters
1 month voting period
3 days to argue


Round 1 is just for acceptance.
Mikeee

Pro

I will debate this with you, I will post my argument in the second round.
Debate Round No. 1
kohai

Con

Thank you so much for taking this debate and I look forward to an excellent debate. Remember we are using a literal reading of Genesis.

Contention 1: The Flood is Scientifically Impossible

C1.1) Tree ring dating

Since we are getting a literal reading of the texts, we know for a fact that the fllood would have occured 2500-2300 BCE [1]. However, this produces a major problem. It is a fact that there are tree ring datings that go well beyond 10,000 years and have produced 0 evidence of a catastrophie of that time [2].

C1.2) The flood did not leave traces on the sea floor.

According to Genesis, the flood lasted for about 1 year. This should be reconizable in the sea floor due to the following:

1. An uncharacteristic amount of terrestrial detrius;
2. Different grain size distribution in the sediment;
3. Shif in oxygen isotope ratios;
4. Massive extinction; and
5. Many other characteristics.

The problem, of course, is that none of those things that are predicted in a global flood have shown up [2].

C1.3) The polar caps are impossible if a global flood really did occur.

Such a mass of water as the Flood would have provided sufficient buoyancy to fload the polar caps off their beds and break them up. They wouldn't regrow quickly. In fact, Greenland would not regrow under modern climatic conditions [2].

Contention 2: A World-wide food is historically impossible.

Since we are taking a literal reading of Genesis, we are also taking a literal reading of the genealogies. Therefore, if we can prove that cultures existed before and after 2500-2300 BCE uninterrupted, we can prove that Noah's flood is a myth.

The Egyptian Pyramids were built about 2560 BCE [6], apparently, the Egyptians were not affected by this "global" flood. Neither was Assyria [4], China [5], or Sumer.

Just a sidebar note, here is an interesting quote from Answers In Genesis:

"The placing of a catastrophic global flood in the year 2304 BC means that all civilizations discovered by archaeology must fit into the last 4,285 years." [8]

Obviously all civilizations do not fit into the last 4,285 years; nor do scientific evidence.

| CONCLUSION |

My opponent has agreed that we are taking a literal reading. Therefore, the historical and scientific evidence is sufficent to prove that a "world-wide" flood never occurd. I could go into math details, but honestly do not feel like it.

I await my opponent's opening arguments as to why Noah's flood is a world-wide is a historical event.

___________
Sources
1. http://www.creationtips.com......
2. http://www.talkorigins.org......
3. http://ga.water.usgs.gov......;
4. http://tinyurl.com......;
5. http://tinyurl.com......;
6. http://www.authenticwonders.com......;(Egyptian Pyramid Source)
7. http://ancienthistory.about.com......;
8. http://tinyurl.com......;
Mikeee

Pro

Contention 1: The Flood is Scientifically Impossible

A world wide flood is scientifically possible, The world has gone through many phases, one phases was Pangiea, when all of the world's land mass was connected together. Matter cannot be created nor destroyed, only change forms, that's exactly what happened between the Earth's earliest phase and our current phase of having 7 different contents. The point being, it is certain that the land was lower than it is currently, the Rocky and Himalaya mountain ranges did not always exist, when where formed over thousands and thousands of years. With the land being lower, it was more venerable to flooding, of any scale. The world has gone through change and was different during the time of the flood then it in its current state.

Contention 2: A World-wide food is historically impossible.
The old testament of the bible is not a first person account of what happened. Most of the stories in the old testament where written by Moses, who was told them by people who head it from the ancestors who passed it down generation to generation. It was more than a few generations from the time of Moses and the time of Noah. The dates that where told, along with many other details, have been skewed due to the lack of written records. We also are not completely sure of the procurement of time they used, they could be talking about a year as something different than 365 days, most people where farmers and kept track of time by knowing the differences between harvest and planting season. In the passage with the description of the arch, they use the measurement, "quibit", whats a quibit? Also, you said that the flood lasted about a year, the passage states that it lasted 40 days and 40 nights. The term "world wide flood" is also a possible exaggeration or misconception, North America was founded long after the times of the old testament, point being, it is likely that Noah did not know of a world much further that of the Mesopotamian region, where is is likely from. Even if the dates are correct and Egypt was established, it was isolated from most of the world, so not many civilizations where not aware of it, as they did not come in contact until later. When old testament was written, they Jews had just left Egypt and where wondering the desert for the Holy Land, They, Moses and the Jews, well knew that Egypt existed, but again, Noah's persaption of the world is being looked at through the eyes of someone living in the modern world, and not someone who lived in the time of early agriculture development, which is most likely the time Noah was living in. Most of the "facts" in the bible are not up-to-date with modern standers, because it took place in a time when knowledge and intellectual studies did not happen, day to day life was getting enough food to survive.
Debate Round No. 2
kohai

Con

Thank you for accepting this debate. I was hoping you would provide evidence of a global flood.

C1) The Flood is Scientifically Impossible

My opponent has not quite refuted anything I have stated other than stating the fact that the world has gone through many phases. "The world has gone through change and was different during the time of the flood..." This begs the question, "How was the world different?"

My opponent has not given any evidence that the flood is scientifically possible, rather he is just supporting my claims. I have provided many reasons why the flood is impossible. I would like for my opponent to rebute it.

Here is a summary:




      1. Scientific impossibilities.

            1. Tree ring dating

                  1. Tree rings have been factored long before and after the flood without any interruption of a catastrophe of the flood's magnitude.



            1. The flood did not leave traces on the sea floor.



            1. The polar caps are impossible if a global flood really did occur




C2) The flood is historically impossible.


This, I feel, is my strongest assertion of the two claims. Remember that we are reading a literal account of Genesis thus puting the time frame of the flood in a time frame of 100 years or so.



The Pentetuch was certainly not written by Moses [1]. "The passage states that it lasted 40 days and 40 nights." Actually, there is another verse that states that the waters "rose for another 150 days" and the ark landed on the "mountains of Ararat" more than a year later."

"The term 'World wide flood' is an exaggeration.' I believe that this is impossible. Allow me to ask you these questions;

      1. If it was just a local flood, why did Noah have to relocate into the ark and bring two of every creature?



      1. Wouldn't God be breaking his promise each time there is a local flood?


Remember: This is a LITERAL interpretation and the historical evidence does not add up, thus I extend those arguments.

My opponent not only needs to refute my arguments, but also show how it is possible and give EVIDENCE for a world wide flood being a historical event.

___________________________________________________________________________________

[1] For information of this, please see the book Rejection of Pascal's Wager available online at www.rejectionofpascalswager.net
Mikeee

Pro

You have to understand, when these events took place, much of the world was still undiscovered by most people. That being said I do believe it is more or less a "local" flood. Think of it this was, when Hurricane Katrina hit Florida most of Florida was flooded, but they knew that the rest of the US existed, but what if Florida was unaware of any of the other states or countries? Without the knowledge of an outside world, people in Florida would have described it as world wide, because that is all of the world that they knew of. When I was talking about the world going through different phases, my point was, we do not know the exact topography of the Mesopotamia at that time, all we know is that it was mainly an agricultural stated that depended on the constant flooding of the surrounding rivers to have fertile soil to farm. You asked "How was the world different?". Well, the contents moved across oceans and thousands of miles, and there is scientific evidence of Pangeai, so is it a large stretch to say that ground levels where a few meters lower than current day?

It might be scientifically impossible for a world wide flood, but I am focusing on the historical evidence. Between the years 2600 and 3500 BC, the two Mesopotamian civilizations of Kish and Ur, went through a series of floods, one of the floods could be the one that is referred to in Genesis. Out of all the floods that took place is Mesopotamia, the flood of Shuruppak is most likely the flood that because that is where most people believe Noah to be from. As for an arch being built and taking two of each animal, again, Noah did not have knowledge of every single animal that was in existence, he took every animal that was known to the Mesopotamian people at the time and put them on the arch. If he took every animal, how would it be possible to get animals that are native to places like North America, and Australia? People only knew as much as they have seen, most people never saw more than Mesopotamia.

You continue to use the examples of tree rings and the flood not leaving traces of the ocean floor, these are all solid facts, but the only problem is, they are irrelevant. Even if a world wide flood took place in the 1300s tree rings of the Red Wood Forest would be irrelevant, because they would have not yet been discovered. As for the sea floor traces, irrelevant, the only bodies of water that could be effected by a flood of Mesopotamia are the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. If you are going to show evidence of flood damage to bodies of water, show places relevant to the agricultural world. Polar ice caps, again, not yet discovered. Noah's arch landed on the mountains of Ararat, which are in current day Iran, which is home to many historical Sumerian cultures, which is evidence to the arch landing there because Moses was a Sumerian and he would have brought is culture and culturally diffused it and pass it down to his children, who would eventually populate the whole region.

If it was just a local flood, why did Noah have to relocate into the ark and bring two of every creature?
Back to the example of Hurricane Katrina, the flood was local to Mesopotamia and its surroundings, It in no way would have effected people in Asia and the Americas. While many people where displaced from their homes when Hurricane Katrina hit, they relocated to other states that where not hit by the hurricane, and once the water was gone, they where able to go back to Florida. The place where Moses landed the arch was the first place that either recovered or was unaffected by the flood. He had to create the arch in order to escape the flood that engulfed most of the Mesopotamian world that he knew.

Wouldn't God be breaking his promise each time there is a local flood?
The Tigris and Euphrates rivers' floods can be predicted and where used to produce fertile land. The flood was a step above local, but was not "world-wide". Hurricane Katrina was not just a "local flood", it was more than the average flood that most people from Florida have ever seen. So no, each time the rivers flooded, God would not be breaking his promise, because that was a normal event. A flood of that scale was something that never happened before.

Just a side not that is not really reliant to the debate; The difference between the Bible and other many religious texts and writings such as the Quran, is that the Quran is a first person account and has not been translated or manipulated in anyway, it says exactly what it was intend to. The Old Testament of the Bible was written by many different people and mostly second hand accounts of events and stories that took place a long time ago. Also the bible has been translated into different languages and has multiple versions. Even the Latin and English bible has slight differences, just keep that in mind when you talk about the literal interpretation.
Debate Round No. 3
kohai

Con

Thank you yet again for your opening arguments. My opponent has still failed to provide any evidence that a world-wide flood was a historical event. Remember, the Burden of Proof is shared. Since this is the last round, I'm just going to summarize and give a few breif statements.


I understand the world--most of it, was undiscovered. However, there are some serious question beggings:
  1. If this was a local flood, isn't God breaking his promise by the local floods?
  2. Why did Noah have to build an ark and gather two of every land creature?

" It might be scientifically impossible for a world wide flood,..."

It seems like my opponent has conceded the fact that it is impossible for a world wide flood thus I have won this debate. Remember that I am debating a literal world-wide flood. That was my definition and that is how I am arguing. Sure it is possible for a local flood, but that is not super natural.


I would like to thank you for this debate and urge a CON vote. My opponent shown no support or evidence for a literal world-wide flood (as I defined such) and I have thus won this debate.

Mikeee

Pro

I have no further "new" evidence, just a few clarifications and ending statements to make.

The time frame in which this event took/did not take place is when civilization started to emerge. What was there before civilization? People just roamed the Earth looking for food, just like normal animals, so until civilization emerged, homo sapiens-sapiens where just another mammal senselessly roaming the Earth. Until we had power over ourselves and could understand the relationship between each other and the relationship between ourselves and a superior force (God), we were still animals. With that being said the agricultural world of Mesopotamia was the only world in which humans existed, in a human state. Sure, homo sapiens-sapiens could have inhabited other parts of the world when this flood hit, but that doesn't change anything. If you actually read the Bible passage, the whole moral of the story was that God was punishing the "HUMANS" for disobeying him. Because the "HUMANS" disobeyed God, He wiped them out and destroyed their entire "HUMAN" world (except Noah). If you are saying there are people who survived the flood living in some other continent, all you are showing is that they had not yet evolved in to "HUMANS". If God where a doctor and the Earth was a patient with cancer, then it would only be logical to remove the cancer, why would you amputate all their limbs when there is nothing wrong? The only evidence you are showing is that Mesopotamia is the only place that "HUMANS" have developed during the distinguished time period. If you were hoping someone could show you some "scientific" evidence that the whole world, pole to pole, was covered with water at one point, then I am sorry to disappoint you. When being literal you have to not allow yourself to be blind to some obvious things.

If this was a local flood, isn't God breaking his promise by the local floods?
I'm not talking about just some little agricultural village being flooded, I'm talking about all of Mesopotamia and possibly parts of Asia Minor, that's a little bigger than "local".

Why did Noah have to build an ark and gather two of every land creature?
Again, that whole area of Mesopotamia is a little larger than a few square miles. Look at where Kish and Ur where, then look at where Modern day Iran is, that's a bit of distance to swim, no less carry a pair of each animal living in the region.

Throughout this debate you have provided no evidence, except the lack there of. All the evidence you used to try to disprove the fact of the flood was either saying something doesn't add up, or completely irrelevant. You have shown no evidence or a reason (assuming there was no flood) that people would decide to tell a story of a flood that wiped out all humans other than Noah. All you have stated is your personal opinion on this subject. If people decide to believe my side, that the agricultural world of Mesopotamia was wiped out, I have evidence supporting the theory. Your only rebuttal are questions that I have answered multiple times.

If you agree with my evidence, theory, or conclusion then vote PRO.
Debate Round No. 4
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
RFD:
"Con concedes that a world wide flood (including 'Noah's flood of genesis') was scientifically impossible ["It might be scientifically impossible for a world wide flood..."] and tries to argue that, because of the limits of human knowledge of other regions, Genesis only depicts a portion of the world that was flooded. However, he makes several mistakes: he did not attack Con's arguments until only late in the debate, made new arguments in the final round (costing him a point for conduct), blurs the line between objective history and 'subjective' (again drawing upon the argument that the world in Genesis was confined to Mesopotama), contradicts himself on the issue of Noah's flood being scientifically possible, and so on...Good debate, but I believe Con has won the debate. Good job to the both of you.
Posted by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
Good debate
Posted by Mikeee 5 years ago
Mikeee
I just remembered I forgot to post my source for arguments in the second round. Here they are:

http://ncse.com...
http://www.indoeurohome.com...
http://answers.yahoo.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Posted by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
In case if there was a bit of a misunderstanding like last time, I'll just say that I'm going to look forward for the arguments.
Posted by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
Sorry for the weird format. Not sure what happeneed.
Posted by Warhawk423 5 years ago
Warhawk423
The Great Flood was an event and was considered a "Historic Event" by the Christians. But like any other religion the matter is that US cannot adapt this as a historical even due to the fact that it's a simple belief. You are arguing religion really. If you could define what you mean by it being a "Historic Event", if you mean by school systems adapting it and teaching it, then no; but if someone can define it as a Historic Event in their personnal philosphy and or religion, then yes
Posted by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
I suppose you amended the definition after your last debate with 00ike.
Posted by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
Doesn't matter wither way. I'm just gonna use cold, hard scientific facts to prove it is impossible for it to happen. My opponent can make that choice.
Posted by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
ReformedArsenal
Does it presuppose a system in which God does not exist or does not intervene in the physical world.
Posted by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
In what sense?
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by larztheloser 5 years ago
larztheloser
kohaiMikeeeTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:24 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro affirmed the flood of genesis being historic. Con's responses were "that's not what genesis literally says." Pro proved, however, in round two that for the authors of Genesis, "world" literally meant only that which had been discovered. Con made some good points of his own but ultimately they didn't defeat pro's argument. Clear pro win. Pro should learn to use sources (ie the thing about qubits).
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
kohaiMikeeeTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: The definition given in the challenge is that the flood was "world wide." Pro grants there as no worldwide flood, therefore Con wins arguments. It wouldn't be a debate topic if it were about a local flood.
Vote Placed by Raisor 5 years ago
Raisor
kohaiMikeeeTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: I really dont see how Pro is meeting the agreement of a "literal interpretation." Also, there is very little analysis of the text in question to support his theory of the flood being "the world as they knew it." As a side note (unrelated to my decision as it was not presented in round): Pro's understanding of geologic time is wayyyyy off. Also, even a flood as Pro describes it would leave substantial geological and historical evidence.
Vote Placed by Cerebral_Narcissist 5 years ago
Cerebral_Narcissist
kohaiMikeeeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO rejects his own resolution!
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
kohaiMikeeeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: See RFD in comments page....