Never Rained befor Noah?


#1

My inlaws are Southern Baptist and they came over to our house for a visit this weekend. Somehow we got on the topic of Noah and the great flood. That was when they started saying that it had never rained before the flood. :confused: That is also why they say Noah and his family were so persecuted because no one could concieve of the concept of rain???:eek: I would like to hear someone elses opinion of this, cuz this is the first time I have ever heard of such a thing!:shrug:


#2

How did the plants grow without rain?

Adam and Eve were sent out of the Garden of Eden. They were told told that they had to till the ground and eat plants of the field.

Cain was a “tiller of the soil”. (Genesis Chapter 4)

This to me suggests farming.

How can a farmer grow crops without rain?


#3

I have heard this theory before. Supposedly there was dew and mist and water seeping up from the ground (like an underground spring), but no rain. This no rain theory usually goes along with a strict 6-day creation and young (based on the geneologies in Genesis) earth belief.

I don’t believe this idea. In Genesis it says that God separated the water on the earth from the water in the sky, so I think there were clouds and rain from the beginning.

The Church tells us only that we must believe that God create the earth and everything in it (and the whole universe) out of nothing. The Church doesn’t say anything specific about HOW this happened.


#4

Back to the same old theistic evolution concept which especially for me as a Christian doesnt make any sense at all.


#5

Genesis 2: 5 and 6: Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. * But a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground."* (Italics mine).


Don’t make fun of people. This is a reasonable theory of moisture. It has nothing to do with “evolution.” Why do you think it’s so ridiculous? It can be supported by science.


#6

Who`s making fun of people?


#7

Hi LisaJ, there is a deeper issue, then just “no rain” in their thinking that you need to be prepared to address, it is known as the water vapor canopy theory. They came up with this theory to explian the long ages of people, and to explain where the flood water came from.

Here is what a renown physicist, a Bible-believing Christian, had to say about the vapor canopy. He is referring to the model which was made popular by Whitcomb and Morris in their classic, The Genesis Flood.

They assert that the canopy’s sudden collapse would have increased the volume of the ocean by 30 per cent (p.326). This would mean that 30/100 of the original ocean volume, or something like 30/130 of the present ocean volume, came from the canopy. **That amounts to about 75 million cubic miles. That quantity of water in the form of a vapour canopy would raise the pressure of our atmosphere from its usual 15 pounds per square inch to a crushing 970 pounds per square inch, which would create all sorts of problems for living things.

Worst of all, the pressure in the base of the canopy would be so high that it would need to have a temperature of over 500 degrees Fahrenheit.** (Any cooler, and it would collapse into rain.)

(Hayward, 1985, p.151)

talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-add.html

frayn.net/evolution/claim2.html

The Impossible Voyage of Noah’s Ark
by Robert Moore
ncseweb.org/resources/articles/8619_issue_11_volume_4_number_1__3_12_2003.asp

There was no rain before the Flood.’ This is not a direct teaching of Scripture, so again there should be no dogmatism. Genesis 2:5–6 at face value teaches only that there was no rain at the time Adam was created. But it doesn’t rule out rain at any later time before the Flood, as great pre-uniformitarian commentators such as John Calvin pointed out. A related fallacy is that the rainbow covenant of Genesis 9:12–17 proves that there were no rainbows before the Flood. As Calvin pointed out, God frequently invested existing things with new meanings, e.g. the bread and wine at the Lord’s Supper.

creationontheweb.com/content/view/2996


#8

Thank you so much for your response. I truly had never heard of this before and your comments and links have shed light on this for me. I have a 5 year old and a 7 month old so those kind of comments generate questions and I don’t want to contradict their Catholic upbringing. Thanks again for all the help.

***For me I still believe it had to have rained before the flood to keep the natural order of Gods creation. :slight_smile:


#9

I just read the article you posted “The Impossible Voyage of Noah’s Ark”, I dont want to go through the whole article but it is very typical of those who claim that either there is no God or if there is God then he has to work within limitations of the laws of nature etc.

For example Moore says:

"…On the other hand, in an era when hollowed-out logs and reed rafts were the extent of marine transport, a vessel so massive appeared that the likes of it would not be seen again until the mid-nineteenth century AD. Before he could even contemplate such a project, Noah would have needed a thorough education in naval architecture and in fields that would not arise for thousands of years such as physics, calculus, mechanics, and structural analysis.

Noah would have not needed any knowledge, God inspired him and showed how to do it. Why must we assume that Noah was a primitive tribesman instead of a highly intelligent individual? How can we know for sure?

There was no shipbuilding tradition behind him, no experienced craftspeople to offer advice. Where did he learn the framing procedure for such a Brobdingnagian structure? How could he anticipate the effects of roll, pitch, yaw, and slamming in a rough sea? How did he solve the differential equations for bending moment, torque, and shear stress?

Why does all this matter?

Ancient shipbuilding did achieve a considerable level of technological sophistication, so much so that marine archaeologists are divided over its history (Basch, p. 52). But this was for vessels that were dinghies compared to the ark, and this skill emerged slowly over many centuries: nearly a millennium passed while Egyptian boat lengths increase from 150 to 200 feet (Casson, p. 17). Despite this, the craft remained a prescientific art, acquired through long years of apprenticeship and experience, and disasters at sea due to faulty design were so persistent that the impetus was strong for a more scientific approach (Rawson and Tupper, p. 2). Obviously, the astronomical leap in size, safety, and skill required by Noah is far too vast for any naturalistic explanation.

Of course there is no simple naturalistic explanation but that is exactly the point when God works through miracles! How could Daniel`s friends survive the fire? How could Jesus walk on water and raise from the dead? This is ALL scientifically impossible, yet we know it happened.


#10

I do not believe it rained prior to the flood. :nope:

From Genesis Chapter 2:

5(F)Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, (G)for the LORD God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground.
6But a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground.


#11

Thats before God formed man from the dust of the Earth, not before the flood.


#12

It seems from scripture that God withholds rain until there is someone who can appreciate the miracle. So it seems logical that it rained after the creation of man.


#13

… or after the flood. :wink:


#14

Hi Pedja, lets put it in simple terms that even a seven year old who has a pet can understand. There were only eight people on the boat with 24 hours a day right?

If they slept 6 hours a day that leaves 20 times 8 man hours to work, eat, etc., or 160 working hours, that is 9,600 working mintues. If it took ten mintues a day for them to service each animal ( feed, clean, remove waste material ) that means they could only take care of 960 animals, since there was at least two of every kind, that would be 480 species, that is nowhere close enough to account for every existing species on earth today.

Basic question, where did all the water go?

Runaway subduction. John Baumgardner created the runaway subduction model, which proposes that the pre-Flood lithosphere (ocean floor), being denser than the underlying mantle, began sinking. The heat released in the process decreased the viscosity of the mantle, so the process accelerated catastrophically. All the original lithosphere became subducted; the rising magma which replaced it raised the ocean floor, causing sea levels to rise and boiling off enough of the ocean to cause 150 days of rain. When it cooled, the ocean floor lowered again, and the Flood waters receded. Sedimentary mountains such as the Sierras and Andes rose after the Flood by isostatic rebound. [Baumgardner, 1990a; Austin et al., 1994]

The main difficulty of this theory is that it admittedly doesn’t work without miracles. [Baumgardner, 1990a, 1990b]

The thermal diffusivity of the earth, for example, would have to increase 10,000 fold to get the subduction rates proposed [Matsumura, 1997], and miracles are also necessary to cool the new ocean floor and to raise sedimentary mountains in months rather than in the millions of years it would ordinarily take.

Baumgardner estimates a release of 1028 joules from the subduction process. This is more than enough to boil off all the oceans. In addition, Baumgardner postulates that the mantle was much hotter before the Flood (giving it greater viscosity); that heat would have to go somewhere, too.

Cenozoic sediments are post-Flood according to this model. Yet fossils from Cenozoic sediments alone show a 65-million-year record of evolution, including a great deal of the diversification of mammals and angiosperms. [Carroll, 1997, chpts. 5, 6, & 13]

Subduction on the scale Baumgardner proposes would have produced very much more vulcanism around plate boundaries than we see. [Matsumura, 1997]

New ocean basins. Most flood models (including those above, possibly excepting Hovind’s) deal with the water after the flood by proposing that it became our present oceans. The earth’s terrain, according to this model, was much, much flatter during the Flood, and through cataclysms, the mountains were pushed up and the ocean basins lowered. (Brown proposes that the cataclysms were caused by the crust sliding around on a cushion of water; Whitcomb & Morris don’t give a cause.)

How could such a change be effected? To change the density and/or temperature of at least a quarter of the earth’s crust fast enough to raise and lower the ocean floor in a matter of months would require mechanisms beyond any proposed in any of the flood models.

Why are most sediments on high ground? Most sediments are carried until the water slows down or stops. If the water stopped in the oceans, we should expect more sediments there. Baumgardner’s own modeling shows that, during the Flood, currents would be faster over continents than over ocean basins [Baumgardner, 1994], so sediments should, on the whole, be removed from continents and deposited in ocean basins. Yet sediments on the ocean basin average 0.6 km thick, while on continents (including continental shelves), they average 2.6 km thick. [Poldervaart, 1955]

Where’s the evidence? The water draining from the continents would have produced tremendous torrents. There is evidence of similar flooding in the Scablands of Washington state (from the draining of a lake after the breaking of an ice dam) and on the far western floor of the Mediterranean Sea (from the ocean breaking through the Straits of Gibralter). Why is such evidence not found worldwide?

How did the ark survive the process? Such a wholesale restructuring of the earth’s topography, compressed into just a few months, would have produced tsunamis large enough to circle the earth. The aftershocks alone would have been devastating for years afterwards.

talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

wheaton.edu/ACG/

asa3.org/


#15

I suggest you read Genesis because it, the scriptures limits the flood to natural causes. Nothing in the text indicates the “extra” made up miracles you try to lay claim to.

Genesis 7

4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."

12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.

17 For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. 18 The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. 20 The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet.

24 The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days.

Genesis 8

1 But God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and the livestock that were with him in the ark, and he sent a wind over the earth, and the waters receded. 2 Now the springs of the deep and the floodgates of the heavens had been closed, and the rain had stopped falling from the sky. 3 The water receded steadily from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the water had gone down, 4 and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.


#16

**The earliest indisputable evidence of human habitation in northwestern North America dates from nearly 12,000 years ago (about 11,700 BC). **Some South American sites (Monte Verde on the Chilean coast, have recently been date to more than 12,000 years ago). Arrow points and other artifacts from this period found in Alaska and parts of northwestern Canada have been labeled the Paleo-Indian tradition. These are the so-called Clovis fluted arrowheads. No direct evidence of such a culture has come to light in adjacent parts of North Asia, although a possible prototype has been found on Sakhalin Island. Most likely, the people who developed the Paleo-Indian culture crossed over the Bering Strait (the land bridge had by that time already been submerged by rising seawater) into Alaska earlier than 14,000 years ago and there developed a new culture. Another possibility is that the prototype of this culture is to be found beneath the waters of the present day Bering Sea. Whatever the direct origin of their fluted arrows and other technology, these Paleo-Indian big game hunters quickly spread southward into a land teeming with game as a warming climate opened gaps in the ice sheets covering northern Canada. Within 1000 years of the first evidence of human habitation in Alaska, the same Paleo-Indian assemblages of tools appeared in all habitable parts of North and South America, from the Canadian plains to the tip of present day Chile. It has been estimated that if a group of a few hundred humans entered the Americas and moved at a rate of only eight miles per years, their natural increase, as the first inhabitants of a rich land, would have led to a population explosion (for hunter gatherers) and spread throughout all of the habitable portions Western Hemisphere in about a thousand years. This is exactly what seems to have happened.

pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ea210/SiberianOriginsNA.htm

YEC set the date of the flood to about 6,000 years ago.

google.com/search?hl=en&q=Noah%27s+Flood+6%2C000

And, yet the native americans here in the United States were NOT wiped out by a global flood !!!


#17

Yep. That’s how it went. God said it. I believe it. That’s called faith my friend. :thumbsup:


#18

Amen Sister :smiley:


#19

cuz this is the first time I have ever heard of such a thing!:shrug:

Me too.

How does this view affect their theology? How does this view affect faith and morals?


#20

Hi, Mark A
They interperetthe bible as Sola Scriptura. To be honest I’m not even sure if they are still under the umbrella of the Southern Baptist Convention. They church they used to attend split and they created a new church. They are very good and kind people we just have very differing views of how we worship. Preaching in their church is not of as much importance as Sunday school classes and singing, along with fellowship. Their views on some moral issues confuse me with their belief of Sola Scriptura. Such as contraception and the death penalty. I also want to try and homeschool my children and his parents mainly his mother seem against it. In the south it doesnt matter the schools are way below par as long as you are a constant social butterfly :rolleyes: . They like to come over on Sunday afternoons and they always have some tid bit they like to share that they learned in Sunday School. Such as how they say it never rained before the flood.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.