GEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE FOR NOAH’S FLOOD

Posted on by

In Genesis 6:13, we read that before the Flood, regarding “all flesh”, God said to Noah, “I will destroy them with the earth” (’eretz). Then, in Genesis 9:11, after the Flood, God confirmed to Noah that by the Flood He had indeed destroyed the created Earth, when He said, “never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth” (’eretz). Whatever constituted the ’eretz that was created on Day 1, God destroyed it by the Flood cataclysm.

Corroborating God’s revelation to Noah that the created Earth (’eretz) had been destroyed in the Flood (Genesis 9:11) is the record of widespread destructive volcanic and sedimentary processes evident in the Precambrian rock record. In the Precambrian we see evidence of huge volcanoes, depositing lava accumulations up to 22 km thick, including abundant products of explosive volcanic activity.

Rocks of the Precambrian cratons, including the exposed Precambrian shields, comprise some 71% of the Earth’s total land area. Extensive study of exposed Precambrian strata, motivated by its content of valuable minerals, has resulted in the accumulation of copious geological information on the Precambrian.

This information can be used by creationists to incorporate all of the Precambrian into a Genesis Flood geologic model.

There are abundant products of volcanism, including explosive volcanism, and volcanic lava sequences up to 22 km thick, throughout the Precambrian geologic record. Superpositional relationships of distinct lithological associations enable global correlation of early Precambrian strata. A Genesis Flood geologic model is proposed wherein the Flood cataclysm was initiated by a sudden reduction of gravitational force which decompressed the earth’s hot, water-saturated mantle. The Precambrian rock record was extruded from the mantle and deposited during Day 1 to Day 40 of the Flood cataclysm.

Widespread evidence of destructive volcanic geologic activity throughout the Precambrian corroborates the Scriptural record of the destruction of the created earth (’eretz) by the Flood cataclysm (Gen. 9:11).

This should lead us to preclude a Creation Week or Antediluvian origin for the Precambrian geologic record, and instead consider all of the Precambrian as Flood deposited. Walker noted that the Precambrian Strelley Pool Chert formation in the Pilbara region of Western Australia (figure 6) is underlain and overlain by rocks deposited from volcanic eruptions, and suggested:

“From a biblical perspective, it is inconceivable that volcanoes would be active during Creation Week, depositing volcaniclastics and tuff such as comprise parts of the stratigraphic sections [emphasis added].”

Widespread evidence throughout the globally correlated Precambrian rock record of huge explosive volcanic eruptions comprises tuffs, ignimbrites, pyroclastic flows, volcaniclastics, accretionary lapilli/lapillistone, and agglomerates. The processes necessary for the accumulation of accretionary lapilli/lapillistone include an atmospheric ash column, moisture, accretion, deposition, and lithification. We might reasonably question whether atmospheric ash columns would have been occurring during Creation Week.

Deposition of even the thinnest of these volcanic accumulations, the 10.5-km-thick Swaziland Supergroup (figure 3), over six days during Creation Week, would require lava to accumulate at 1.75 km stratigraphic thickness per day. The 22.0 km-thick-lower Pilbara Supergroup of Western Australia (figure 6) would need to accumulate at 3.67 km of lava per day if deposited during Creation Week.

On the basis of the volcanic content, and especially the explosive volcanic content, and the widespread destruction of organisms throughout the Precambrian, we should, I suggest, question a Creation Week or Antediluvian origin for the Precambrian rock record, reconsider the way we interpret the Precambrian fossil record, and conclude that the Precambrian is all Flood deposited.

Consistent with Genesis 7:11 and Proverbs 3:20a, Noah’s Flood may have been initiated by God causing the mantle to heat in a cataclysmic global thermal-tectonic episode, cracking open the earth’s crust and driving out water to the earth’s surface. Secular scientists have found evidence of episodic rifting events at the margins of North America between 0.8 and about 0.6 Ga. These are thought to record the fragmentation of a Neoproterozoic supercontinent.13,14 This is consistent with the breaking open of the crust by the fountains of the great deep, followed by further continental extension and then ocean formation.

Biblical Geology 101 is avalable from CMI http://www.creation.com


MORE EVIDENCE FOR A YOUNG EARTH

Posted on by

Bending rock sounds like the feat of a superhero. But this incredible achievement really occurred in the earth’s past. There are many places around the world where thick layers of rock are folded, sometimes at angles of 90°! One prominent example is the Carbon Canyon Fold.

The Carbon Canyon Fold is located in a side canyon adjacent to Grand Canyon itself. The layers making up the fold are a sequence of sandstone, siltstone/claystone, and limestone. Together, they make up the Tonto Group. In most places, the Tonto Group layers are just as horizontal as when they were deposited. But this is not the case with the Carbon Canyon Fold. How were these layers warped at such an unusual angle?

Conventional wisdom tells us that the oldest layers of the Tonto Group layers are approximately 525 million years old. Geologists think the uplift that folded the Tonto Group layers started between 70 and 50 million years ago. It was not complete until a mere five million years ago.

This model is problematic, however. There is no known mechanism by which the Tonto Group could have remained wet and pliable for 465 million years! The folded nature of this rock unit is incredible evidence of their relative youth. Those who believe these layers were formed over vast eons of time proposed other ideas to explain how the layers were folded long after hardening into rock.

Metamorphism is a process capable of making solid rock pliable again for folding. This can occur when the rock experiences extreme heat and pressure far beneath the earth’s surface. However, this cannot explain the folded layers seen in the Tonto Group. Metamorphism completely alters a rock’s mineral makeup. For example, such heat and pressure turn sandstone into quartzite. Claystone turns into a schist. Meanwhile, limestone turns into marble. If metamorphism were responsible for folding the Carbon Canyon Fold, evidence for this process should be obvious.

The best explanation for the warped nature of the Carbon Canyon Fold does appear to be that the process of folding occurred in the not-too-distant past. Most young-earth geologists think the uplift that caused the folding occurred over a period of time lasting just hundreds, and not millions, of years. If hundreds of millions of years passed between the formation of the Tonto Group layers and their uplift, the Carbon Canyon Fold should be a jumble of shattered rock fragments. The fact that they are not stands as testimony to their relative youth.

This article comes from a new blog post put together by a group of young scientists that are working under well-established Ph.D. Creation scientists https://newcreation.blog

FURTHER EVIDENCE FOR NOAH’S FLOOD

Posted on by

The recent observation of ‘floating islands’ large enough to support trees and monkeys provide interesting support for the biblical framework of animal dispersal after Noah’s Flood. Current long-age theories of biogeographical dispersal struggle to explain how rafting across oceans could be viable. However, the Flood would have provided much fodder for the formation of large floating vegetation mats akin to modern ‘floating islands’, but much larger, potentially enabling them to survive trips even across oceans.

There are numerous small floating islands on isolated water bodies adjacent to the Magdalena River of northwest Columbia. The rafts are composed of aquatic plants, bound together and floating. As the floating islands grow, they can support large woody vegetation such as vertical trees. These floating islands typically are 30 m long, but some are greater than 100 m long. One floating island was observed to have trees up to 10 m tall and monkeys on the limbs. Theoretically, as the river floods, it could pick up one of these floating islands and send it downriver to the ocean, where it could even float for a distance on the ocean. Apparently, ocean travel has not been observed. Still, the authors believe this observation provides the potential for explaining cross-ocean transport.

Photograph of one of the floating islands on the Magdalena River during the December 2016 field trip (credit UF). As a scale guide, the raft is about 80 m across. Also note that O’Dea et al. (2016) includes video footage from 2010 of similar scale rafts travelling down the Chagres River in Panama.

Despite the new observation, the evidence still suggests that the uniformitarian ideas of vegetation rafts and short-lived land bridges are very unlikely. For one, the rafts would be too small, assuming the vegetation was ripped up by a storm, deposited in a river, and carried to the ocean. Then there are the numerous other challenges presented by Mazza et al. listed in tables 1–3.

Creation scientists have a much better option for explaining biogeography. First, the rafts of logs and vegetation are a result of a violent global Flood, so they do not have to drift down a river to the sea, but would already be floating on the oceans. Based on the estimated amount of coal, it is likely that the pre-Flood biosphere had about 10 times the amount of carbon, which could translate into 10 times the number of plants and trees compared to the present earth. Although masses of this vegetation were deposited within the sedimentary rocks, much of it would have continued to float on the oceans after the Flood. These logs and vegetation mats could be extensive and thick and last many years. They should be able to transport small animals, and possibly relatively large animals, across water bodies. The ocean currents and winds during the Ice Age would have been different than they are today. Although we do not know these variables, we are not constrained to explain biogeography by the present-day water currents and wind patterns. Moreover, there was much more rain during the early- to mid–Ice Age, so the need for fresh water on the log mats would not necessarily have been a problem. It is likely that plants and even trees grew on these post-Flood floating islands, providing food for animals. I have observed plants growing on wood pilings (figure 1), so the same thing could occur on the floating islands.

Article: A floating island with growing trees and monkeys observed IN SECTION: PERSPECTIVES by Michael J. Oard in Journal of Creation 2022 Vol 36, Issue 3

THE TRUTH ABOUT NOAH’S FLOOD

Posted on by

Genesis, chapters six through nine, describes the most devastating natural disaster in the history of the planet. This was the worldwide Flood of Noah’s day. It was a deluge sent by the Creator of the universe to purge the earth of mankind’s wickedness and violence.

This catastrophe is especially relevant to young-earth geologists. They think that this event is responsible for a significant portion of the earth’s rock layers and fossils. Understanding the Flood is the key to understanding natural history. Unfortunately, there are many misconceptions regarding the worldwide Flood of Noah’s day, among both its skeptics and young-earthers. Creationists must do their due diligence to carefully study the scriptural account of this event. It is important that we have a good understanding of what the Flood was, as this can provide us with clues as to what we might expect to see in the geologic record, and what resulted from the recovery of the earth from this event.

What WAS the Flood Anyway?

Did the Flood Really Happen?

Sadly, there are many people, including some Christians, who think the Flood was nothing more than a myth. It wasn’t always this way. Up until the mid-1800’s, it was universally understood within the Church that the Flood was a real, global, historical event.

As far as non-Christians are concerned, this disbelief in the global Flood is understandable. They interpret the rock record beneath our feet as the result of the geologic processes we see at work today operating slowly and gradually over long timescales, with the occasional major catastrophe thrown into the mix every few thousand or million years. If our geologic record formed over millions and billions of years, it could not be the result of Noah’s Flood. Many think that the Bible plagiarized the Flood narrative from older Ancient Near Eastern texts, like the Epic of Gilgamesh. It describes a similar flood narrative.

For Bible-believing Christians, the matter is more complicated. The psalmist, the apostle Peter, and even Jesus Himself refer to the Flood as a historic event. There is great controversy regarding the extent of the Flood.

What was the extent of the Flood?

While many Christians do think Noah’s Flood really happened, they do not think that it covered the whole earth. They think it was a local flood, only devastating a region within the Ancient Near East. But what can we learn about the Flood’s extent from the text?

From the Mouth of God…and an Apostle

Both the apostle Peter (2 Peter 3:3-7) and Jesus Himself draw very explicit parallels between the Flood of Noah’s day and the return of Christ to the earth. Peter’s words are especially telling: “For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished” (2 Peter 3:5-6).

Of particular emphasis here is that Peter is saying God used the same oceans He created in Genesis 1 to flood the world. The oceans were thrust from their basins and onto the land. This is clearly not describing a flood localized in the Ancient Near East. The Noahic Flood is described as the undoing of the Creation event. And since Christ’s return will have a global impact, it implies that the Flood had a global impact as well.

All Means All

The Hebrew word translated as “all” or “every” in the Flood narrative is kol. It is used 60 times in this narrative! While this word can be used in a nonliteral sense, there is no reason from the text to delimit the Flood’s extent to a certain geographical region. A straightforward reading of the text seems to indicate that this is because there was no need to specify where the Flood happened―it was a worldwide flood!

Purpose of the Flood

The Flood of Noah’s day was the response of God, grieved by the wickedness and violence of His creation. Targeted during this deluge was not mankind only, but also all air-breathing land animals and flying creatures. They too had corrupted their way upon the earth (Genesis 6:13). This only makes sense under a global Flood scenario. If the Flood were local, at least some flying birds, bats, and insects could make their escape.

Height of the Flood

The narrative describes Noah’s Flood submerging the mountains of that time underneath 15 cubits, or ~22 feet of water (Genesis 7:20). And not just mountains, but all of the mountains under heaven. Since water always attempts to find its own level, this verse does not seem to make much sense if the Flood were not global.

Mabbul

A variety of words refer to regular floods in the Bible. One of the more common words is setef (Job 38:25, Psalm 32:6, Proverbs 27:4, Daniel 9:26, Daniel 11:22), nachal (Job 28:4, Psalm 74:15, Jeremiah 47:2). In some translations, yeh-ore (Jer 46:7f, Amos 8:8, 9:5) also refers to regular flooding.

Interestingly, it is not these words that describe the Noahic deluge, but mabbul. This word is never used in Scripture except when in reference to Noah’s Flood. This seems to indicate that the catastrophe it describes is unlike regular flooding events. It was a unique, cataclysmic, one-off event. 

God’s Promises

Once the Flood ended, God made the rainbow a sign of the covenant He made with Noah, his family, and every other living thing. He promised that the waters would never again become a Mabbul to destroy all life on the land (Genesis 9:13-17). If Noah’s Flood were merely a local event, then God has broken His promise many times over. There have been legions of destructive local floods since Noah’s time. In addition, God also assured Noah that the seasons and the day/night cycle would not cease. This implies that the Flood interrupted the planet’s seasonal cycles! On the contrary, these natural cycles are what cause local floods (e.g. India experiences a seasonal monsoon).

One Really Big Boat

At more than 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits in height, the Ark Noah built in order to survive the Flood was massive. As far as we know, the Ark was the largest boat up until the creation of the wooden vessels such as the 3rd-century Tessarakonteres and Zeng He’s treasure ships of the Ming Dynasty. Such a vessel seems more suitable for survival on the open ocean, not in the comparatively shallow waters of a local flood in the Ancient Near East.

How Long Did the Flood Last? 40 Days? 150 Days? A Year?

Genesis 7:17 states that the ‘Flood’ was upon the earth only 40 days, while Genesis 7:24 says the floodwaters prevailed for 150 days. Is this a contradiction? Not at all. The confusion stems from the mistranslation of the word mabbul as the English word ‘Flood’ in Genesis 6-9. In reality, the 40-day Mabbul is not synonymous with the Flood as a whole. Rather, it was a phase of the Flood. It was the Mabbul with which God blotted out the pre-Flood land’s inhabitants. But the floodwaters themselves remained on the earth many more months before the land was dry enough for Noah, his family, and the animals to leave the Ark. Perhaps a better English rendition of the word mabbul would be ‘cataclysm.’ In fact, its Greek equivalent, kataklysmos, specifically and only referred to the Mabbul in both the Septuagint and New Testament (Matthew 24:37-39).

For the sake of clarity, we will use Mabbul only to refer to the rising floodwaters phase, and ‘Flood’ to refer to the entire deluge, from start to finish.

Total Submersion

Once all air-breathing, land-dwelling animals and humans had perished in a watery grave, the floodwaters went from being very, very powerful (Genesis 7:18) to just powerful (Genesis 7:19). By this point even the mountains of that time were submerged beneath over 20 feet of water.

When/After the torrential rain stopped and the fountains of the great deep ceased, God caused a wind to blow over the earth. This marked the beginning of a marine regression as the waters receded. Shortly after the Ark came to rest in the still-submerged mountains of Ararat (Genesis 8:4), the water ceased becoming powerful (Genesis 7:24). Later still, Noah opened the Ark’s window and released a raven (Genesis 8:7) and then a dove (Genesis 8:8-9) to see if there was any dry land. Neither found any. 

Finally, the mountains appeared (Genesis 8:5). The Flood narrative does not tell us whether these mountains are re-emerged pre-Flood mountains or mountains newly formed during the Flood. However, Psalm 104:8 seems to indicate that mountains did form during the Flood, as did ocean basins. These allowed the floodwaters to recede from off the landmasses. Note that the mountains of Ararat is a region and is likely not referring to what we recognize today as a single mountain, Mount Ararat, in Turkey.

Even as they returned to the ocean basins, the floodwaters were anything but tranquil. Genesis 8:5 records that the floodwaters went back and forth as they receded.2 Noah released the dove once more. Upon its return, it brought back an olive leaf. It would have clipped the leaf from a newly-sprouted olive sapling that found a place to grow as the waters fell back. After Noah released the dove a final time, it did not return, implying that it had found a place to call home.

newly formed during the Flood. However, Psalm 104:8 seems to indicate that mountains did form during the Flood, as did ocean basins. These allowed the floodwaters to recede from off the landmasses. Note that the mountains of Ararat is a region and is likely not referring to what we recognize today as a single mountain, Mount Ararat, in Turkey.

Even as they returned to the ocean basins, the floodwaters were anything but tranquil. Genesis 8:5 records that the floodwaters went back and forth as they receded.2 Noah released the dove once more. Upon its return, it brought back an olive leaf. It would have clipped the leaf from a newly-sprouted olive sapling that found a place to grow as the waters fell back. After Noah released the dove a final time, it did not return, implying that it had found a place to call home.

newly formed during the Flood. However, Psalm 104:8 seems to indicate that mountains did form during the Flood, as did ocean basins. These allowed the floodwaters to recede from off the landmasses. Note that the mountains of Ararat is a region and is likely not referring to what we recognize today as a single mountain, Mount Ararat, in Turkey.

Even as they returned to the ocean basins, the floodwaters were anything but tranquil. Genesis 8:5 records that the floodwaters went back and forth as they receded.2 Noah released the dove once more. Upon its return, it brought back an olive leaf. It would have clipped the leaf from a newly-sprouted olive sapling that found a place to grow as the waters fell back. After Noah released the dove a final time, it did not return, implying that it had found a place to call home.

Drying it all up

Even after the floodwaters had receded, God did not permit Noah and the rest of his passengers to leave the vessel. Likely, this allowed time to repopulate the lowest denominators on the food chain—like microbes, plants, and possibly insects—before the hungry animals left the Ark. 

Earlier during the Flood year, prevailing torrents swept away fully-grown trees and other plants. Many of them survived, however, through their seeds, saplings, and sprigs.3 As the earth was drying, plant life would germinate and grow from these humble survivors. There is some debate among creationists as to whether insects were passengers on the Ark.4 If not, and they in fact survived off the Ark, then insect populations at the time could also have begun to refill the earth, pollinating plants and laying down a foundation for the reestablishment of the food chain.5

Three months went by between the time the land had fully reemerged and when God told Noah that they could leave the Ark.

Is there any evidence for the Flood?

Evidence from Rocks and Fossils

A worldwide Flood of biblical proportions would leave worldwide evidence behind. And this is exactly what we find! The continental surfaces of our planet are carpeted in thick packages of sand, shale, and carbonate mud layers that have been hardened into stone.6 They often cover entire regions or continents (sometimes even multiple continents!).

But it’s not just that we find fossil-studded sediment layers―these are marine layers, and the fossils within them are marine creatures, on the continents! The Greater Phyllopod Bed of western Canada,7 the Qingjiang fossil beds of China,8 Wren’s Nest in England, and the Beecher’s Trilobite Bed of the USA9 were likely the result of underwater flows picking up and carrying animals long distances—tens of kilometers in some cases—before depositing and entombing them in sediment layers. This is quite consistent with what we would expect to see if the earth was once submerged beneath the waters of a global Flood!

Evidence from Anthropology

Virtually every ancient culture around the world has a folk tradition that speaks of a ‘great flood’ sometime in their past. There are hundreds of these narratives. And while they do vary from place to place, they each contain very similar elements and characters.10,11

Many describe a favored family that survives a global flood sent to wipe out the wicked generation of that time. They often mention specific animals and people that were spared on a wooden vessel, and speak of how certain animals (usually birds) were sent to see if the floodwaters had gone down. Contrary to popular belief, these stories also occur in places where flooding does not regularly occur, if ever.12

This makes it extremely unlikely for these stories to be based on individual local flooding events. Rather, they are pulling from a universal memory of a world-destroying Flood that their distant ancestors (Noah’s family) really experienced.

Areas of Further Research

As we have seen, there is a great deal we can learn about the Flood from close study of Scripture. There is also much evidence for the Flood in the geologic record and in the collective memory of ancient cultures all over the world.

But there are unresolved questions we as young-earth creationists would like to know about the Flood. These have no bearing on the historicity of this event, but resolving them would bring clarity and help us better understand the Flood in its biblical and real-world context. It also presents a great opportunity for biblical scholars and scientists to work together and answer the toughest questions about the greatest catastrophe in our planet’s history.

When Did the Flood Occur?

The Bible does not give a specific date as to when the Flood occurred. Many young-earth creationists place it at around 350 years before Abraham’s birth at roughly 2000 BC. They obtain this estimate by adding up the ages given in the genealogies of Genesis 11. If correct, the Flood would have occurred around 2350 BC, or around 4,350 years ago.

This has produced several alleged problems. Abraham visits a well-established Egypt in his day. Egypt has written records that would suggest that it was founded around 3100 BC. This predates the most widely-accepted date of the Flood. In addition, some have questioned whether there was enough time after the Flood to form the post-Flood geologic record, and for humans to repopulate the earth and construct major cities. There are a few different ways of looking at these supposed problems.

Your Chronology is a Tad Off!

It is possible that the time it took to form the post-Flood geologic record and the archaeological record was much shorter than previously thought. 

Egyptian Chronology

Take Egyptian history as a case in point. A single ancient source did not record the chronology of this ancient civilization. Historians constructed it after the fact, and in doing so they made many assumptions (e.g. pharaohs mentioned in Egyptian manuscripts never ruled at the same time). These greatly inflate Egyptian chronology. Even secular Egyptologists know that the conventional Egyptian chronology is much too long and must be compiled. How much? We cannot yet say for sure at this time.

Mechanisms of the Flood

The “windows of heaven” is a figure of speech for the 40 days and nights of torrential rain unleashed upon the pre-Flood world. But what about the bursting forth of the ‘fountains of the great deep’? The Hebrew word translated as ‘bursting forth’ is baqa, which means to ‘cleave, break open, or through.’ It is the same word that describes the breaking open of the ground that ended Korah’s rebellion (Numbers 16:31) and the bursting of new wineskins (Job 32:19). This ‘bursting forth’ seems to be describing fissures on the deep seafloor that result in the ‘fountains.’ But our current understanding is not enough to determine whether ‘fountains’ refer to the source, catchbasin, or the water itself.

How literal is the reference to ‘fountains’ bursting forth? Early research on the Hebrew text by Hebraist Dr. Steve Boyd indicates that while the Flood account itself is a sober, historical narrative, the reference to both the ‘fountains’ and the windows of heaven may be more figurative. This would give geologists and other Flood researchers more scientific freedom they can use at their disposal to determine how these mechanisms operated during the Flood.

We also want to know how long the ‘fountains’ and ‘torrential rain’ lasted during the Flood. Genesis 7:4 specifically states that the rain would last 40 days, but it does not specifically state when the fountains of the great deep closed. Some think it could have been closer to Day 150 (Genesis 7:24-8:2), while others think they stopped at the same time the rain did.

40 Days or 150 Days?

When did the final air-breathing land animal not on the Ark breathe its last? Most young-earth paleontologists operate from the premise that this was on the Flood’s 150th day, based on Genesis 7:24. However, Dr. Steven Boyd has cited three lines of evidence suggesting that this would have occurred within the Mabbul, the first 40 days of the Flood.17

  1. Noah lived 350 years after the Mabbul, bringing his total lifespan to 950 years. This means he was still 600 years old when the Mabbul ended. If the Mabbul referred to the entire year-long Flood, Noah should have been 601 years old by its end and lived a total of 951 years.
  2. Genesis 7:12 specifically states that the Mabbul was on the earth for 40 days.
  3. The word “Mabbul” only appears in reference to the rise of floodwaters and again after the Flood. On the contrary, it is not used in association with the floodwaters after they have covered the earth, nor as they are receding.

According to Dr. Boyd, these three scriptural lines of evidence imply the following: if the Mabbul referred to in Genesis 7:23a blotted out all living beings, then because it lasted only 40 days, it blotted out all land-dwelling life that was not in the Ark during that 40-day time span. This has huge implications for how we might interpret the fossil record. More in-depth research of the biblical text is required before we can definitively say how long pre-Flood animals and humans survived during the Flood.

Conclusion

Without a sound understanding of the Flood, we cannot have a firm grasp of young-earth history. This is why it is important for Hebraists to team up with geologists so that both of them can lend their expertise to a better understanding of this worldwide, cataclysmic event.

BIBLICAL VIEW OF THE ROCKS

Posted on by

THE GEOLOGY TRANSFORMATION TOOL – A new way of looking at your world by Tas Walker

Like the recent article Compelling Evidence for a Young Earth this article by Tas Walker is taken from the latest Creation Magazine http://www.creation.com.

Perhaps you have seen a report in the media about a rock outcrop ‘800 million years old’ and wondered how that fits with the history of the Bible. One confronts the same puzzle when reading about a fossil dinosaur that lived in ‘Jurassic’ times. Or we may visit a tourist site with a sign that speaks about a volcano forming ‘25 million years ago’.

If you would like to see your world from a biblical perspective, the simple diagram in figure 1 is what you are looking for. It allows you to work out a first, ballpark understanding of how each situation you encounter relates to the true history of the universe, that is, to the history presented in the Bible.

A Chart of Geological transformation tool
Diagram 1: Geologic Column adapted to show Noah’s Flood sequence

The right side of the diagram has three vertical arrows, which show how these rocks relate to biblical history. The first arrow (green) indicates which rocks formed in the first 150 days of Noah’s Flood as the floodwaters were rising. The second arrow (blue) indicates which rocks formed in the last 220 days of Noah’s Flood as the waters were falling and the continents were rising. The third arrow (yellow) indicates which rocks have formed in the 4,500 years since the Flood ended.

You will notice at the top of the diagram that the biblical arrows overlap, and that at the bottom the green arrow is shown dotted. This is to indicate that there is uncertainty in these areas. The main reason for the uncertainty is that there is not a one-to-one relationship between the rocks on the geological column and biblical history. That is because uniformitarian geologists place the rocks into the geological column using criteria that assume Noah’s Flood never happened. However, the rocks must be understood using criteria based on biblical history, which includes the Creation and Flood events.

When we do examine the geology using biblical criteria, we discover that the geological column provides a general Flood order. However, there are many exceptions and the relationship is highly non-linear. As illustrated in figure 1, most rocks (the Precambrian, Paleozoic, and Mesozoic) formed as the floodwaters were rising on the earth. These are generally of very large scale, both in thickness and geographical extent. The second part of the Flood, when the waters were receding as the continents uplifted, mainly involved huge erosion on the continents. The receding floodwaters deposited the eroded material at the continental margins. Local deposits did occur on the continents but very late in that period, after most of the water had gone.

Easy to use

The figure is easy to use. All that is required is to locate on figure 1 the ‘date’ in millions of years for your example. Then you simply check where it sits on the arrows of biblical history. Let’s look at the examples mentioned above.

For the rock outcrop 800 million years old we see on figure 1 that it fits between the numbers 541 and 2500. To the left, on the column this corresponds to the ‘Proterozoic’ as well as the ‘Precambrian’. To the right, on the biblical interpretation, this corresponds to the period when the waters of Noah’s Flood were rising, and quite early in this period. Given that the waters of Noah’s Flood were rising for 150 days, 800 million years would correspond to the first month or two of the Flood, which occurred some 4,500 years ago.

For the fossil dinosaur that lived in the ‘Jurassic’, we see that this fits between 145 and 201 million years ago. It is part of the groupings called the ‘Mesozoic’ and the ‘Phanerozoic’. On the biblical interpretation to the right we can see that this also corresponds to the time when the waters of Noah’s Flood were rising, but later than the rock described in the previous example. Its position on the arrow indicates that this would have been as the waters were approaching their peak, perhaps a month before that, which would be about four months after the Flood began, 4,500 years ago.

For the volcano ‘25 million years’ ago, we see that it corresponds to the ‘Oligocene’, which is part of the ‘Paleogene’, the ‘Tertiary’, the ‘Cenozoic’, and the ‘Phanerozoic’. On the biblical interpretation to the right we can see that this corresponds to the 220-day (approx. 7-month) period when the waters of Noah’s Flood were falling. This was as the continents were being uplifted, causing the floodwaters to flow off the land into the expanding oceans. This would have been a few months into that period after the waters peaked, which would put this some 8 months or more after Noah’s Flood began, 4,500 years ago.