Resulting in an ice age? It's a stupid biology question in a christian cirriculum.
Resulting in an ice age? It's a stupid biology question in a christian cirriculum.
Christians believe, and all Christians should believe in creation, or they have lost most value of their faith. The issue of evolution and how life progressed is another issue. But yes, in theory from a Biblical viewpoint, there was no rain prior to the flood, that covered either the entire world, or the entire known world at that time. ( that is debatable by Biblical scholars) It would have changed the entire face of that section of the land. No, there is no mention or belief that it caused an ice age
I must point out that this is a science forum, and hence I must also point out that any discussion of a flood that covered the entire Earth has no basis in science. This discussion properly belongs in a religious forum rather than this one. However, I'm intrigued because I hadn't this point of view before. Your belief is that there was no rain, ever, before the flood? How supposedly did plants, crops, and people survive?
I was taught that, before the Flood, the Earth was covered by a mist (like in Seattle?), a mist that may have saturated and pooled during the night and that sufficiently watered plants and supplied water to animals and humans. There's supposed to be evidence of that in Genesis (would have to look) and in the fact that, when the 40 days ended, the first rainbow appeared as a promise from God that he would never destroy the Earth again by flood. If there had been rain before the Flood, there would have been rainbows, according to my teachers.
If I were you, I would answer this question by what the curriculum has been teaching you. That's the only answer that counts, whether its factual, or not.
So what does your textbook and teacher say?
Maybe this is what you are referring to: Genesis 2:6 but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground.
Where did that underground water come from? Is this time period during Pangea when much of the Earth was covered by sea?
I had to chuckle at this. I sincerely doubt that anyone who ascribes to creationism and a literal reading of Genesis with its stories of "mists" before a "flood" would support the notion of Pangea, as it requires an understanding of plate tectonics, which in turn supports the notion of the Earth being billions of years old. You won't get far in a discussion with biblical literalists on topics such as plate tectonics, the fossil record, astronomy (especially cosmology), biology, archaeology, or paleontology. By literalists I mean those who hold that the Earth is on the order of 6000 years old or so, and I suspect that's where the OP's teacher is coming from.
To the OP: I agree with Talaniman - it's impossible for us to guess what your teacher's particular view of creationism is, so carefully read over the material you were given and do the best you can.
I was wondering what a creationist's answer to those questions would be. Well anyway maybe the OP will come back with more details.
Religious schools teach whatever their faith dictates. The only right answer is the one THEY teach.
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:15 PM. |