AboutRev C.Brian Ross Expertise I am happy to offer answers to anyone with a question that refers to the Christian Faith in its widest possible sense. I believe that the Bible is the living Word of God, and seek to base all of my life on its teaching. I also have some knowledge of some of the cults, and of Islam and Judaism. Of course, my answers are just one man's thoughts, and I would always advise a questioner to check with others, and with the Word of God.
Experience Served as a full-time parish minister in Scotland for about six years, and then spent the last thirty as a teacher (now 'retired') of Religious Education in Secondary Comprehensive schools (ages 11-17) while continuing my own preaching and teaching ministry. I also believe that learning is a life-time process, and have recently completed a Master's degree in Divinity.
Organizations Former Presenter on Revival FM - a local Christian, community radio station, broadcasting in west central Scotland, and online at revival.fm Involved with a number of organisations that support Christians who are currently suffering persecution in some 70 countries around the world.
Publications Various articles in Christian magazines. I also have two blogsites - www.crazyrev.blogspot.com and (with audio messages) www.revcbross.blogspot.com
Education/Credentials Diploma of The Bible Training Institute, Glasgow;
Licentiate in Theology of the University of Glasgow;
Associateship of The Philosophical Society of England;
Bachelor of Arts Degree (Hons) in History from The Open University;
Post-grad Certificate of Education - Religious Education and History;
Post-grad Cetificate in Learning and Teaching;
Post-grad Diploma in Management and Learning in Education;
Master of Science Degree from the University of Strathclyde;
Master of Divinity Degree (Hons) from Trinity College and Seminary (accredited by the University of Liverpool)
Question Hello Reverend Ross,
Even though I only have a B.S. in science, I think I can successfully dispute every argument in favor of the Noah's ark story based upon the principles of geology, genetics, zoology, life sciences, physics, etc. Most such arguments seem downright foolish and my question is this: Do you know of any serious members of the scientific community who believe that any aspect of it could be true. (By the way, I wish it were true!)Thank you for your thoughts.
Answer Dear Charlie,
Thank you for your question. Although I don't have any degree in Science (even the M.Sc. on which I am working is in Education!), I have done a fair bit of reading on the whole subject of evolution and Creation - into which discussion the account of Noah and the Ark invariably enters!
Personally, I have no doubt that when the Biblical record refers to the whole earth (Gen 7:19-24) it refers to the total surface of the planet. We are told that "Finally, the water covered even the highest mountains on the earth, standing more than twenty-two feet above the highest peaks. All the living things on earth died — birds, domestic animals, wild animals, all kinds of small animals, and all the people. Everything died that breathed and lived on dry land. Every living thing on the earth was wiped out — people, animals both large and small, and birds. They were all destroyed, and only Noah was left alive, along with those who were with him in the boat. And the water covered the earth for 150 days."(NLT)
In the New Testament, we might refer to II Peter 2:5: "And God did not spare the ancient world — except for Noah and his family of seven. Noah warned the world of God's righteous judgment. Then God destroyed the whole world of ungodly people with a vast flood." (NLT)
The only members of the scientific community who have supported both the "universal" flood and the account of Noah and the ark, and whose work I have read, are: H.M. Morris and J.C.Whitcomb, The Genesis Flood, Evangelical Press, 1961; and Sylvia Baker M.Sc. (Biol), in a published article entitled Bones of Contention, Evangelical Press, 1976 in which she argues the case for a world-wide flood mainly on the basis of the fossil record. The Flood Reconsidered, written by F.A.Filby, Pickering and Inglis, 1970, has a specific chapter on Noah and the Ark - although he does seem to favour a "partial" flood that only effected the area of the modern "Middle East". Part of his argument is to do with the migration of animals, e.g. the kangaroo from Australia, and the mastodon of South America. However, if one accepts (as many in both "camps" do) that, originally, there was just one land mass, then I would suggest that that argument loses its force!
The Ark on Ararat is written by Tim LaHaye and John Morris, Lakeland, 1976. There is no author information given, but I understand that Tim LaHaye is not a professional scientist, although I suspect that John Morris is. Their book certainly provides much interesting information.
For me to go through a complete argument in favour of a total-eart flood, and for Noah and the Ark, would take far longer than an AllExperts answer would allow. Indeed, I would probably have ended up having written another book!! However, permit me to throw one final crumb in your direction. This is with regard to the ability of Noah to build a vessel that would take 2 of every animal (and 7 of some). Firstly, it was not a boat, or ship, in the way in which the average children's story-book represents it, but simply a great big box. Indeed, the Hebrew word "ark" simply means "box" - as in the Ark of the Covenant. It doesn't require a shipwright to build a box! When we check the measurements, we discover that, even if we take a conservative equivalent for the ancient measurements given, we have a structure that would cover three (British!) football pitches, and had three stories . That's a lot of storage space, especially when it seems not unreasonable that only young (and therefore smaller, and easier to feed) animals were taken aboard.
I know that this is not a fully scientific answer, but I would refer you to a website http://www.csm.org.uk/index.php
which you might find interesting. Look at the FAQs, and especially the first one!!
Meanwhile, if I have given you any further food for thought, then I am content.
Blessings,
C.Brian Ross (Rev)
