Re: Flood deposits (was: review of PJs book)

Joel Duff (
Thu, 4 Sep 1997 10:03:22 -0500 (CDT)

Allen Roy responded to my previous question about trace fossils in the
Grand Canyon:

>I concieve of the "Flood" as a global catastrophe composed of thousands of
>various events. At any one locality there could be very violent events
>followed by periods of stasis--inundation (sometimes violent, sometimes
>more calm), sedementation (sometimes fast, sometimes slow), exposure of
>sediment surfaces from time to time, erosional events (channeled or
>sheet), tsunami events, turbidite events, volcanic euptions, flows and
>ash deposition.
>Also, it is thought that the flood catastrophe began slowly and built up
>to a peak over several months. It is proposed that the primary causitive
>facter was earthquakes due to a resturcturing of the crust. Then, most of
>the violence subsided and the rest of the year was spent in relative calm
>as waters drained off and surfaces dried out (however, aftershocks may
>have continued for some time afterward).
>The Ark was probably only afloat for some 110 days. It was not lifted up
>on the waters until after day 40 of the onset of the catastrophe and it
>set down on or just after 150 days. For this and other reasons, it is
>proposed that the Ark was originally built at a reltively high elevation
>(< 1000 m ??) in a mountainous region and landed in a mountainous region
>not long after the peak of the catastrophe.
>What about the mountains being covered by 15 cubits of water? We need to
>remember that Noah and family were sealed inside the Ark and had no direct
>view of the flood (the cover to the window was not removed until long
>after they had landed). Since 15 cubits is 1/2 the depth of the ship it
>is thought that the draft of the ship was therefore 15 cubits. Noah and
>family may have noted that during the whole time that they were afloat
>they never touched bottom, which ment that everywhere they happened to
>drift or be driven by wind, wave or current the waters had to be greater
>than 15 cubits. It is proposed that during at least one event (or perhaps
>for several events) any one locality was completely covered with water,
>the exact measure of which is unknown.


I do thank you for taking the time to respond, it was very informative.
With respect the current discussion and this past post I only had one thing
to add. In general I percieve that you are attempting to incorporate more
elements of the actual flood account into you theory than I have seen among
most global Flood advocates, but it still appears to me that you are not
being wholely true to your implied hermenuetic and are as willing to
interpret the Bible based on your scientific hypothesis as you claim others
are. This seems to create an inconsistent message.

Above you seem to suggest (at least it reads this way) that the whole world
wasn't an any single moment covered by 15 cubits of water but that if one
looked at the entire flood period at some point water covered every place
up to that amount. I am not sure the text warrents such a proposition.
Genesis 7:20 says that the waters covered the mountains to a depth of
about 24 feet, and from 7:24 it appears that the waters covered them for
110 days. That can be drawn from 40 days of rain and underground waters rising
during the first 40 days of the 150 days of prevailing. The passage
necessitates that the acme of the water's rise is reached at the 40th day,
for no new water was added after that. Genesis 7:19 says that the waters
covered all the high mountains under heaven. Isn't the most
straightforward reading of Genesis 7:19 that all were covered at the same
time - a global flood!. It appears that you are qualifying "all" with an
unjustified assumption that the author meant "all but not at the same
time." It seems to me if you claim that the author of Genesis was simply
interpreting based on his experience then that leaves open the possibility
that "all" simply refers to the Mountains under Noah's feet which would
make a local flood a tenable hypothesis, at least to explain this verse.

snip snip
>It seems to me that how one conceives the 'Flood' greatly determines what
>one does or does not think could have happened.

I agree, and it certainly appears that I am not the only one willing to
interpret the text based on scientific hypotheses.

Joel Duff


Joel and Dawn Duff / | ' \ Spell Check?
Carbondale IL 62901 ( ) 0
e-mail: \_/-, ,----'
or ==== //
or / \-'~; /~~~(O)
* * * * * * / __/~| / | * * *
\\\/// \\\/// =( _____| (_________| \\\///