License

I have written an e-book, Does the Bible Really Say That?, which is free to anyone. To download that book, in several formats, go here.
Creative Commons License
The posts in this blog are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. You can copy and use this material, as long as you aren't making money from it. If you give me credit, thanks. If not, OK.
Showing posts with label Genesis flood. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Genesis flood. Show all posts

Monday, October 21, 2024

Sunspots 972

Some things that I have spotted that may be of interest to others:

Joel Duff is perhaps the most articulate anti-Young-earth creationist blogger. He understands criticism, and knows the literature. When I  previously looked his posts, they were not entirely textual, but were mostly YouTube videos. That's not true now. His work includes videos, but the content of the video is generally also presented in text form, where it can be quoted, and where users can see what Duff has to say without disturbing anyone who doesn't want to listen. A recent post concerns the realization, by many Young-Earth Creationists, that it is impossible to explain supposed effects of the Flood, over a brief time period. Here's Duff's post: (The title begins with "Divine Intervention in Geology." an intriguing subject.)

One of my readers noted that the post above had an incorrect link. I believe that it is now corrected, and thank that reader.

Scientific American has a good article on how and why many trees change color in the fall.

Thanks for looking! I hope to publish Sunspots from time to time, but have ceased publishing every week.

Thursday, January 26, 2023

Damage to pre-Flood structures?

Graphic from Wikimedia Commons

One way of evaluating the claims of Answers in Genesis (AiG) that there was a world-wide Flood in Noah's time, is to look for flood damage to ancient structures.

Going to the AiG web page, and entering “when did the Flood take place?” the answer given is approximately 2348 B. C. 

The Great Pyramid of Giza was built about 2560 BC, and the great Sphinx about 2500 BC, according to this web page: https://www.worldhistory.org/timeline/Egyptian_Architecture/, both before the Flood. See also the Wikipedia page on the Great Pyramid, and the one on the Sphinx. I have found no evidence of flood damage to either of these structures, and if there was any, AiG would have emphasized it. So there was not a world-wide flood, or the supposed dates of their construction are incorrect. AiG disputes the timeline used above: (https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/ancient-egypt/were-the-pyramids-built-before-the-flood/) and claims that the dates for the Egyptian structures would have been after the Flood. I’m not an expert on Egyptian ancient history, and can’t evaluate AiG’s claims on this point. However, if AiG is correct, a post-flood civilization, capable of amazing feats of planning and building, would have had to arise in Egypt quickly, presumably from a small subset of Noah's descendants.

The Megalithic Temples of Malta were built from about 3600 to 2500 BC. (https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Megalithic_Temples_of_Malta) There doesn’t seem to be any evidence of flood damage or deposition. 

Here's a post that considers a number of questions related to the Flood.

Thanks for reading!

Tuesday, March 03, 2020

Answers in Genesis believes in evolution, although it's reluctant to use that word

Lest there be any doubt, Answers in Genesis (AiG) believes in evolution, although it is reluctant to use that word: A museum exhibit about the processes associated with “natural selection” and “speciation” throws much light on such questions. Noah actually only needed about 16,000 animals on the Ark to represent all the distinct kinds of land-dwelling animals. The above quote was taken from an AiG source, and is part of the explanation as to how the ark could have held enough animals to become so many species. How? because natural selection after the flood led to abundant speciation!

If natural selection and speciation aren't part of evolution, in fact most of it, I'm not sure what evolution means. Darwin's book title began like this: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection... See here for more on AiG's proposals on how so many animal types came to be.

See here for unrelated problems with the AiG source, which is an attempt to portray the scope of human history.

Added May 19, 2020:
For more on proposed rapid speciation, from AiG and other Young-Earth Creationists, see here.

Added July 18: 2022: Todd C. Wood, a young-earth creationist with solid scientific credentials, discusses this matter briefly, and objects to calling Ken Ham, head of AiG, an evolutionist.

Thursday, July 18, 2019

Were land-dwelling vertebrates the only organisms preserved on the Ark?

Genesis gives the impression that the animals preserved from the Flood of Noah's time were mostly, or entirely, land vertebrates -- mammals, birds, and land-living reptiles and amphibians, although it doesn't explicitly say this:
Genesis 7:1 Yahweh said to Noah, “Come with all of your household into the ship, for I have seen your righteousness before me in this generation. 7:2 You shall take seven pairs of every clean animal with you, the male and his female. Of the animals that are not clean, take two, the male and his female. 7:3 Also of the birds of the sky, seven and seven, male and female, to keep seed alive on the surface of all the earth. 7:4 In seven days, I will cause it to rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights. Every living thing that I have made, I will destroy from the surface of the ground.” (World English Bible, public domain)

Leviticus 11:20 “‘All flying insects that walk on all fours are an abomination to you. 21 Yet you may eat these: of all winged creeping things that go on all fours, which have legs above their feet, with which to hop on the earth. 22 Even of these you may eat: any kind of locust, any kind of katydid, any kind of cricket, and any kind of grasshopper. 23 But all winged creeping things which have four feet, are an abomination to you.
This passage from Leviticus may indicate that Arthropods (insects, spiders, and more) were classified, by God, as clean or unclean, just as mammals and birds are. That doesn't prove that, say, butterflies and centipedes were on the Ark, but it is possible.

Some questions come to mind. (In 2007, I posted a series of questions about Noah's Flood. There is some repetition with the previous post in the current one, but the two are significantly different.) The questions here are related to the variety and care of the animals on the Ark.

1) Does the Bible really describe a world-wide flood? Others have considered this, and there are plenty of opinions available, so I won't attempt to answer this, except to say that there seem to be these possibilities:
a) there was a world-wide flood.
b) there was a localized flood, but it was experienced by ancestral humans, who thought it was world-wide, or described it as if it were. (perhaps they were living in a large basin, which became the Mediterranean Sea after the flood.) See here for a discussion by theologians who believe that there was an important flood, but that it was not actually world-wide. Here is a discussion of the literary genre of Genesis 1-11. At least some important early theologians did not take Genesis 1-11 to be strictly historical.
c) The entire story of Noah and the Flood is a parable, or just a story, in the Bible to emphasize the dangers of evil living, and God's care for His creation.

Added May 19, 2020:
Here's a post from a Christian geologist who believes that there really was a flood in Noah's time, but does not believe that the Bible really teaches that it was world-wide. He also does not believe that that flood was responsible for as many geological phenomena as many Young-Earth creationists claim that it was.

2) If there was a world-wide flood, how did animals from, say, New Guinea, get to the Middle East, in order to get in the Ark, and, if they did, how did they get back to their origin, without leaving evidence of their passing through, including offspring and fossils, behind them? Joel Duff has considered this question in depth for armadillos and their relatives.
3) How were pairs of unclean animals selected? I have done some bird sexing, and, although, in many cases, it is easy to distinguish males from females, in some cases, it isn't, and the same would be true of many reptiles and amphibians, and even some mammals. Did the animals come marching, or slithering, or hopping, or flying, into the Ark in pairs by Divine impulse of some kind? Genesis seems to indicate that Noah was to do the selecting. {"you shall take with you")
4) Some mammals, such as anteaters, have insects as their diet. Was it necessary to have not just a pair, but, say, an entire termite nest, on the Ark, for the feeding of such mammals? That would be far more than a pair, or seven, of termites.
5) Some bees, ants, some wasps, termites, mole rats, and other animals are eusocial. Would a pair, or seven of these, be able to survive? For example, honeybees would presumably need a queen, a drone, and workers of more than one type.
6) Many animals eat living, fresh plant material, such as pollen, nectar, leaves, or fruit. Would the Ark have needed a bamboo grove for giant pandas, or a field of flowering plants for bees and butterflies? Living plants require sunlight for photosynthesis, leading to growth. Would the ark have had provision for lighted plants? The diets of some animals (like pandas) is restricted to a single type, or very few plants, and it is difficult to see how conditions on the ark could have been able to support all of the different types of plants needed by the variety of animals. Answers in Genesis has considered these questions. Basically, their claim is that the animals on the ark were not specialized as to diet.
7) Many salt-water organisms don't do well if suddenly immersed in fresh water, or are unable to survive in fresh water at all. The reverse is also true. (See here.) Presumably the flood, if there was a world-wide one, was of fresh water. Either the oceans of Noah's day were fresh, or marine organisms of that time were much better able to survive sudden immersion in fresh water than most current organisms.
8) How could there have been room for all the types of animals? Answers in Genesis has considered that question, and their belief is that there were less than 150 types of animals on the Ark, and that all of the variety of land animals now in existence evolved (although they don't use that word much) from these. I find such a proposal impossible to believe. (So do others!) There's no fossil, traditional or artistic evidence for such rapid changes and diversification in animal form and behavior -- lions seem to have been lions for at least the past few thousand years for example. If this rapid evolution occurred after the Ark landed, why didn't it occur between Adam's time and Noah's, so that there would have been much more than 150 kinds by Noah's time? See here for a fuller discussion.
9) If there was a world-wide flood, how were land-living invertebrates, such as snails, insects, centipedes, spiders, annelid worms, and more, stored, fed, and protected? (See question 6, above.)
10) If there was a world-wide flood, why is there little or no geological evidence for this?

Thanks for reading.

Friday, August 03, 2018

Young-earth creationism and the kinds of animals

Genesis 1:20 God said, “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of sky.” 1:21 God created the large sea creatures, and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed, after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind. God saw that it was good. 1:22 God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 1:23 There was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
1:24 God said, “Let the earth produce living creatures after their kind, livestock, creeping things, and animals of the earth after their kind”; and it was so. 1:25 God made the animals of the earth after their kind, and the livestock after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind. God saw that it was good. 

7:1 Yahweh said to Noah, “Come with all of your household into the ship, for I have seen your righteousness before me in this generation. 7:2 You shall take seven pairs of every clean animal with you, the male and his female. Of the animals that are not clean, take two, the male and his female. 7:3 Also of the birds of the sky, seven and seven, male and female, to keep seed alive on the surface of all the earth. 7:4 In seven days, I will cause it to rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights. Every living thing that I have made, I will destroy from the surface of the ground.”
7:5 Noah did everything that Yahweh commanded him. (World English Bible, public domain.)

Young-earth creationists, of which Answers in Genesis is the most prominent organization, believe that there was a world-wide flood, occurring about 2348 BC, and that the land animals, including land-based birds, have all descended from the animals that Noah and his family had in the ark with them.

Saving all of the animals causes what seems to be an insurmountable problem for young-earth creationists. How did all of these creatures fit on the ark, and how was it possible to feed them? The answer, from Answers in Genesis, is that there were about 137 kinds of animals, and all of the types we have today descended from them. (This doesn't include insects -- at least some young-earth creationists believe that they weren't taken on the ark. Another estimate from Answers in Genesis is that there were about 1500 kinds of animals on the ark. I'm not clear on why the difference, although the larger estimate is said to have included "flying creatures." Perhaps the lower estimate doesn't include them.) It is doubtful that the Genesis word usually translated "kind" corresponds to any of the categories used by today's taxonomists. Young-earth creationists do not claim that it does.

How many species of animals are there now?
This source, citing an authoritative textbook, says that there are currently 5,416 species of mammals on earth. (This presumably includes water-living mammals, which, according to young-earth creationists, were mostly or entirely not found on the ark. The Answers in Genesis belief is that extinct animals from ancient times, such as the saber-toothed tiger, would have descended from animals on the ark, too.)

This source indicates that, until recently, it was thought that there were 9,000-10,000 species of birds, but that this number is an underestimate, and that there are perhaps twice that many. This source indicates that there are about 7,000 species of amphibians. This source indicates that there are about 10,793 species of reptiles. (This research article proposes that there were 11 kinds of turtle on the ark, which have given rise to 313 living species, and 3 kinds of alligator/crocodile, giving rise to 25 current species.) Using 9,000 as the number of species of birds, and 4,800 as the number of species of land mammals, there are about 31,500 species of birds, mammals, amphibians and reptiles now on earth. There have been some extinctions within recorded history -- dodos, moas, the marsupial tiger, dinosaurs -- yes, Answers in Genesis proposes that dinosaur kinds were on the ark -- and others, which would add to the number of species that must be accounted for. Young-earth creationists believe that no more than about 1,500 kinds of animals became 31,500, or more, species, within the last 4,366 years. That means that, on average, each of those 1,500 kinds evolved into 21 species over that period, and that number is probably an underestimate. That's an astounding claim!

Here's a brief statement of the Answers in Genesis position, with a diagram of part of the "cat kind." The diagram indicates that the cat kind of animals, on the ark, evolved into lions, house cats, jaguars and cheetahs. (And, presumably, servals, ocelots, leopards, tigers, including saber tooth tigers, and more.)

R. Joel Duff has written about these beliefs of young-earth creationists, and finds them wanting, for a number of reasons. Some of my criticisms, listed below, are derived from his article:

1) Answers in Genesis, which rejects evolutionary mechanisms for the origin of large groups of organisms, over long periods of time, wants us to believe that evolutionary mechanisms are responsible for an astounding unfolding of many species, over a few thousand years. Answers in Genesis does not say "evolutionary mechanisms" much, or at all, but they are really relying on natural selection for the unfolding of species from ancestral kinds.
2) One criticism of main-stream evolutionary thought, by young-earth creationists, is that some fossil links are missing. But there are no known fossils, from the last 4,366 years, of any of the proposed species explosions after the Ark landed. Furthermore, cave art doesn't show such transitional forms. They are missing!
3) The Bible seems to describe lions, and other animals of Bible times, as if they looked and acted as they do today. Samson encountered a lion in about 1,100 BC, so the cat kind, according to Answers in Genesis, would have diversified to about what it is today in a mere 1,300 years or so. Is that possible? If it is, why haven't animals continued to expand the number of species up until the present day, or why did evolution stop at lions, 3,000 or so years ago, and not continue cat diversification?
4) There is no observational evidence from ancient literature for this explosive diversification.
5) Duff points out that scientific reasoning persuaded Answers in Genesis that there was not room in the Ark for all of the species we now have. The idea of rapid speciation after the flood is a new idea, not one that ancient Biblical scholars got from the text of Genesis. It has come about mostly, or entirely, because of the realization, by young-earth creationists, that it would have been impossible for Noah's family to house, feed, and clean up after 30,000 or so animal species within the dimensions of the Ark. In other words, young-earth creationists, who often accuse Christians of other persuasions about origins, that they are putting science ahead of a plain reading of the Bible, are in fact doing exactly that. See here.
6) This is a matter of culture and esthetics, I guess, rather than a logical objection, but what would Answers in Genesis have us do with all the Bible story picture books that show giraffes, zebras, lions, tigers and other animals, either with Adam and Eve in Eden, or on the Ark with Noah? Do they want us to replace these with pictures of their own inventions, the ancestors of the kinds? (Added June 8, 2022: The answer is "yes." see here for an AiG statement on this subject.)
7) Are we to believe that the names Adam gave to the animals would shortly be outdated, because of rapid evolutionary processes? (In most of the Old Testament, including Genesis, the names of people were chosen carefully, and matched the person's perceived character. Adam may have done that in naming the animals.)
8) Dogs have been artificially selected for thousands of years, but they are still dogs. Why, then, should we believe that natural selection would bring about an explosion of many species from an ancestral dog kind, in a few thousand years?
9) If hyperevolution was responsible for turning 137, 1500, or some other relatively small number of species (or kinds) into over 30,000 after the Ark landed, wouldn't it also have been responsible for rapid diversification before the Flood? If that had happened, wouldn't it have multiplied the kinds considerably?

Thanks for reading. For a chart showing many of the strengths and weaknesses of several views of origins held by Christians, see here. (All views of origins have weaknesses -- young-earth creationism isn't the only one that does!) For "What's wrong with young-earth creationism?" see here. For evidence that at least one of the important Bible scholars of the past, St. Augustine, did not necessarily believe that the earth is only a few thousand years old, see here.

Addendum, September 5, 2018: the Naturalis Historia blog discusses the idea that dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time, and points out several problems with that idea. 

October 26, 2018: I recently saw a post on the Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham debate, held in 2014, on the Gospel and Evolution blog. The reaction to the debate is of considerable interest, but this statement is especially pertinent to the subject of the post you are reading: "Ken Ham didn’t seem to have a problem at all with a 1,000 or so 'kinds' undergoing speciation since his alleged global flood 4,000 years ago to become the millions of species alive on the earth today, not to mention the billions that have lived and become extinct."

Thanks for reading.

Added November 30, 2018: A post by Naturalist Historia (R. Joel Duff's blog) discusses the adoption of evolutionary mechanisms in the explanations given by Answers in Genesis

Added December 31, 2018: David Heddle, of "He Lives" also writes about the problem that the large number of species raises for Mr. Ham and his followers. 

Added January 18, 2019: Naturalis Historia discusses horses, and related species, and examines what the Bible says about horses, and concludes that it's not possible for all horse types (including extinct ones) to have come from a single pair. 

Added March 5, 2019: R. Joel Duff has analyzed articles by adherents of Answers in Genesis, and, again, finds the hyper-evolution thesis to be spectacularly unbelievable. (In fact, Duff quotes one AiG author, who states that ordinary evolutionary processes could not have been responsible for the amazing number of bird species of the finch kind, if they all descended from one kind, after the Flood.) Here's one of Duff's articles. It has links to an AiG related publication.

July 18, 2019. This blog post was edited somewhat, including the addition of criticism 9.

August 20, 2019. See this post for more on the subject.

May 19, 2020. For more on proposed rapid speciation, from AiG and other Young-Earth Creationists, see here.

May 26, 2020. An article, published in Answers Research Journal, an organ of Answers in Genesis, and authored by important YEC scientists, says this: "In short, the YEC model proposes significant amounts of morphological change in a window of time that, by comparison with evolution, is extremely short."

July 18, 2022: Todd C. Wood, a young-earth creationist with solid science credentials, reacts to some who are calling Ken Ham, head of Answers in Genesis, an evolutionist. He is sometimes called that because of his belief in hyperevolution.

Monday, September 10, 2007

Some Questions about Noah's flood

The great flood in the time of Noah was God's flood, not Noah's, but it has often been given Noah's name.

I am well aware that there are debates about the authenticity of the story of Noah, which is told in Genesis 6-10. There are also Bible scholars that believe that Noah was a historical figure, but who doubt that the flood was truly world-wide. (Humans might have been located in a relatively small area at the time of Noah.) I do not have resolutions for such debates. I pose them, and some other questions, below. I'm not sure that any view of Noah and the flood is without serious weaknesses.

1) Why is the story of Noah in the Bible?
Only God can answer that question, of course, but the story emphasizes God's hatred of evil, His love for the righteous, and His concern for not just humans, but for all of his creation.

2) Did Noah really exist?
New Testament passages, as well as the Old Testament, seem to indicate pretty clearly that the answer is "yes". They include at least these: 1 Chronicles 1:4, where Noah and his sons are included in the genealogies of the ancestors of the Hebrews (Noah is also listed in the genealogy in Luke 3); Isaiah 54:9, where God, through Isaiah, promises comfort to the Israelites, as He made a promise to Noah; Ezekiel 14, where the prophet lists Noah as an example of righteousness, along with Job and Daniel; Matthew 27, where Jesus compares the surprise that will attend His return with surprise at the destruction in the time of Noah (this is repeated in Luke 17); Hebrews 11, where Noah is listed as one of the heroes of faith; 1 Peter 3, where Peter speaks of Noah (I'm not clear on the meaning of that passage); and 2 Peter 2, where Peter uses the story of Noah as a warning to the wicked, and a comfort to the righteous.

3) Was the flood world-wide?
Maybe. Maybe not. The description says that it covered the whole earth, but 1 Kings 10:24 says that the whole earth came to hear the wisdom of Solomon. Surely not inhabitants of the New World? Australia? Daniel 8:5 says that, in a vision, Daniel saw a goat coming across the whole earth. Perhaps, in both these cases, especially the first, the whole known earth is meant. Perhaps not. Perhaps that is what is meant in the case of Noah's flood. I don't know. There are Bible scholars who believe it was world-wide, and those who don't.

Added May 19, 2020:
A Christian geologist, who believes that there really was a Flood in Noah's time, gives reasons why he is not convinced that that flood was really world-wide. He also does not believe that it was responsible for the many geological phenomena that some Young-Earth Creationists claim that it was.

4) Where did all the water come from? Where did it go after the flood?
Especially if the flood was world-wide, there is no good natural answer to that question. There doesn't seem to be enough water to cover the mountains all over the earth. God could, of course, have specially created the necessary water, and removed it after the flood. If the flood was local, the amount of water required would have been much less, depending on where humans were living at the time. Some have suggested that they were living in a large valley, which, after the flood, became the Mediterranean, or the Caspian, Sea.

5) Where is the geological evidence for the flood?
Although some claim that there is geological evidence for a world-wide flood, few, if any, academically trained geologists believe this. One practicing geologist, trained by young-earth creationist geologists, came to doubt that the geological evidence was there, and asked some other geologists, also trained by persons who believed in the influence of the flood, how what they had learned about the flood from this training was useful in searching for petroleum. None of them could give a positive response.

6) If the flood wasn't world-wide, why didn't God just tell Noah to go somewhere else?
I don't know. He was a witness of God's righteousness while he and his sons were building the ark, and perhaps God's mercy wanted his work, and his righteousness, to bring about repentance in his neighbors.

7) Were there any dinosaurs on the ark?
See previous post.

8) What happened to all the plants that were exposed to water for a long period of time?
This page attempts to answer that. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't.

Added July 10, 2020: Here's an article on the distribution of plants and the flood. For example, there are no cacti in the Old World, which is hard to explain, if there was a world-wide flood which could have distributed seeds around the world.

9) What happened to the salt-water fish during a world-wide flood?
This page answers that, or tries to. Maybe that answer is correct, maybe not.

10) How did slow-moving animals, like sloths, and some turtles, get to the ark, and how did they get back after the flood, if it was world-wide?
God may have started them earlier than, say, zebras, I suppose.

11) How about amphibians (frogs, salamanders, and the like), which would have been expected to dry out if they had to travel long distances over land?

12) Presumably the ark was built in the Middle East, or in East Asia. How did animals from North and South America, and Australia, get to the ark, and how did they get back after the flood, if it was world-wide?
It is possible that there were land bridges between all the continents, that aren't there now, but this flies in the face of the geologic evidence, and scientific evidence is part of God's revelation to us (Psalm 19, Romans 1:20).
It is possible that God directed their footsteps (or flight), and transported them to the vicinity of the ark, and back. Note that, especially in Australia (and other smaller isolated land masses) there are animals that don't live anywhere else. Did they leave the ark and go straight home, without leaving any offspring behind?

I don't know the answer to any of these questions for sure. Some people claim to. Perhaps they are right.

See my previous post on the question of whether or not dinosaurs are still alive.

Thanks for reading.

This post was slightly edited on December 27, 2016 and January 19, 2017.

See also these questions, raised by a different blogger.

Added on August 3, 2017: For further material on the flood (not by me) see this post, which is part of a series of five. You can easily access the rest of the series from it.

December 13, 2017: I quote from an article by Caspar Hesp:
In a YEC global flood scenario, it is problematic to explain how all marsupial descendants and fossils could have been constrained to the Americas and Australia, before and after dispersion from the Ark of Noah. Post-Flood hyperspeciation after a single migration cannot be invoked because the variety among marsupials is too extreme to be categorized as a single “kind” or “baramin”.

For an in-depth, and very critical, analysis of YEC's view of the Flood, see this article.