Local Noah Flood refuted? (AiG stupidity)

Here’s my response to the AiG objections to belief in a local Noah Flood.  The red text is my response and the black text is their stupid article quotes.  

Many Christians today think the Flood of Noah’s time was only a local flood, confined to somewhere around Mesopotamia.  This idea comes not from Scripture, but from the notion of “billions of years” of Earth history.  

OEC isn’t a compromise to evolution.  No progressive creationist believes in evolution and neither do I.  OEC has been around since the 5^th century A.D. so how can it be compromise when it existed before the theory of evolution was ever even thought of?  If you don’t believe me look it up for yourself, you’ll find out I’m right.  I guarantee it. 

But look at the problems this concept involves:

·         If the Flood was local, why did Noah have to build an Ark?  He could have walked to the other side of the mountains and missed it.

o    Because that wouldn’t have worked, Noah needed a pulpit and that’s what the Ark was.  That’s where God has always worked. 

·         If the Flood was local, why did God send the animals to the Ark so they would escape death?  There would have been other animals to reproduce that kind if these particular ones had died.

o    Because the animals in question were the ones that don’t migrate, for this reason alone you’re still wrong.  I’m right. 

·         If the Flood was local, why was the Ark big enough to hold all kinds of land vertebrate animals that have ever existed?  If only Mesopotamian animals were aboard, the Ark could have been much smaller.¹

o    Uh even in the idea of a global Noah Flood the ark still wouldn’t have been big enough to do the job.  This can be easily shown.  Look it up for yourself.  Wrong the Ark just the right size for the job God intended, it didn’t need to be any smaller or larger.  Besides no OEC believes the Noah Flood was that small; it covered Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Saudi Arabia, and a little of Northeastern Africa.  So there, I’m still right.  God Bless, Amen. 

·         If the Flood was local, why would birds have been sent on board?  These could simply have winged across to a nearby mountain range.

o    Refer to response 2, so there.  Animals that don’t migrate aren’t built for migration; therefore they can’t and won’t migrate.  For birds this is especially true, when a heavy deluge most birds will drown rather than fly.  This is a scientific fact.  If you don’t believe me look it up for yourself, you’ll find out I’m right!!  Stop repeating yourself and this talk will get better. 

·         If the Flood was local, how could the waters rise to 15 cubits (8 meters) above the mountains (Genesis 7:20)?  Water seeks its own level.  It couldn’t rise to cover the local mountains while leaving the rest of the world untouched.²

o    First of all 15 cubits is 6.8 meters not 8 meters.  Second of all there ain’t enough water on Earth to cover the entire planet in any amount.  There wasn’t enough back then and there ain’t enough now and there never will be enough. 

·         If the Flood was local, people who did not happen to be living in the vicinity would not be affected by it.  They would have escaped God’s judgment on sin.³ If this happened, what did Christ mean when He likened the coming judgment of all men to the judgment of “all” men (Matthew 24:37–39) in the days of Noah?  A partial judgment in Noah’s day means a partial judgment to come.

o    Uh let’s get this notion outta the way, there were no people that weren’t in the vicinity back then.  The people of the Earth didn’t become globally dispersed until after the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:1-9).  So whether it’s YEC or OEC there’s no conflict here.  Neither of us believes in a partial judgment on either account. 

·         If the Flood was local, God would have repeatedly broken His promise never to send such a flood again.

o    Uh wrong!!  Since no flood since has judged all of humanity than His promise hasn’t been broken.  Again you need to learn what us OECs actually believe. 

Belief in a world-wide Flood, as Scripture clearly indicates, has the backing of common sense, science and Christ Himself.

Back then worldwide didn’t mean what it means today.  Back then it had a different meaning; this can be seen other places in Scripture why should the Noah Flood be any different?  So no it doesn’t have a backing in common sense (in fact I’m the one using common sense, not you).  Also it doesn’t have a backing in science (again I’m the one using science, not you).  Christ blesses me, not you.  Amen, so there. 

[On a side note I hate fact that YEC has stolen all the good names!!  Amen.]