IMPORTANCE OF THE
BIBLICAL FLOOD FABLE
TO CREATIONISTS

The bedrock of the Creationist argument rests squarely on the Biblical Flood as it is told in the Chapter of Genesis.

Why is the Biblical Flood so important to creationism?

Because the actual fossil record firmly supports the gradual evolution of life over time as described by science, and it represents some of the most damaging evidence against creationism (the idea that all species of organisms on earth were created instantly and fully-formed). Therefore, it is of critical importance to creationists to provide an alternate explanation for the presence of fossils and the geological column. The story of Noah and the Ark gives them an opportunity to explain away the embarrassment of a fossil record that documents life's increasing complexity and diversity over the millennia, and ancient creatures that no human eyes have ever seen.

While the biblical flood story is almost certainly derived from the earlier Babylonian flood mythology, modern creationists are under the misapprehension that such an event is an historical certainty. What is the evidence for their conclusion? Do they provide geological evidence that the whole planet was at one time, everywhere at once, covered to it's highest peaks in water? No. Their only "evidence" comes from biblical scripture:

"...the main reason for insisting on the universal Flood as a fact of history and as the primary vehicle for geological interpretation is that God's Word plainly teaches it! No geologic difficulties, real or imagined, can be allowed to take precedence over the clear statements and necessary inferences of Scripture." Henry Morris, Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science (1970) p.32-33 [emphasis added]

While that's fine as a religious belief, this statement absolutely disqualifies creationism as any sort of science, and places it firmly in the realm of theology. Henry Morris (one of the founding fathers of the creationist movement), is saying that if the physical evidence suggests that events occurred differently than the accounts spoken of in the Christian bible, then the physical evidence should be rejected out of hand.

It is said that: "When the evidence contradicts the theory, the scientist rejects the theory. The theologian rejects the evidence." This is certainly the case with creationism. One more quotation that should make you extremely skeptical of creationist claims:

"It is precisely because Biblical revelation is absolutely authoritative and perspicuous that the scientific facts, rightly interpreted, will give the same testimony as that of Scripture. There is not the slightest possibility that the "facts" of science can contradict the Bible." Henry Morris in the first paragraph of Scientists Confront Creationism edited by Laurie R. Godfrey [emphasis added]

In other words, don't bother questioning the bible, because it's right-- period. When reality conflicts with scripture, it's reality that is wrong. So creationists go out in search of only what supports their theology, while ignoring every observation that contradicts it.

A global flood would have been such a catastrophic event that if it really, actually occurred, there would be unmistakable traces of it. It must have left clues. What would that evidence be like? What would we expect to find? The following items are a list of physical evidence that geologists would expect to find if the world was, at one time, covered by a global flood.

None of these following conditions has been observed. If creationists were really interested in proving their case, and not just trying to knock evolution, they would venture out and look for examples of these conditions. Imagine that. (We have just done them a big favor by providing them with a laundry list of strong evidence that would convince us!)

What the following information indicates is that a worldwide, global flood never occurred. Not once in the history of the world. People of integrity must not, therefore, continue to insist that the chapter of Genesis is a literal description of history. Science has hereby refuted it, absolutely. This web page represents the final nail in the coffin of "flood geology". To continue to insist that a global flood was a historical reality is not only inaccurate, it is fraudulent and dishonest.

Jim Moore