The Pyramids vis a vis the Flood

Seems to me the pyramids pose a problem when considering the flood.If they were built before the flood, there would be much evidence inside the structures. The great pressure of several thousand feet of water would force water through any little crack or seam, into the structure and when the flood waters receded, would remain there for many many years, if not forever, as there'd be no pressure to force the water back out. Certainly there'd be 'bathtub rings' plainly visible even today.If they were built shortly after the flood, who would have done the building? There are over a hundred pyramids throughout Egypt, each requiring thousands of man-years to complete. Even if Noah and family reproduced like bunnies, and they all moved to Egypt and worked only on building pyramids, they couldn't have gotten the job done within certainly a very many centuries.So which is it?Before the flood with no evidence that the insides were ever wet;
or after the flood, when there was no labor to complete the task.Just curious as to a 'logical' answer.

---

The Bible has to be true - no one could make all that up.

That's cheating.They like to point to all the "evidence" they conjure up to physically justify the flood and the Biblical timeline. I'd like a non-magical explanation for either no evidence of flooded pyramids or where the workforce came from for post-flood construction.Or, I would like them to fully admit that magic is the only explanation and that there is no possibility of ANY evidence proving them wrong, regardless of how compelling the evidence is.

I threw the question out hoping that a Flood believer would explain how the Flood could be taught - and believed - when there is something so fundamentally (no pun intended) wrong. And logically wrong. No hocus pocus. No mysterious DNA or geologic columns. No 'rocket surgery' involved. Good old plain common sense physical evidence.Could someone believe that a stone structure, set without morter, be watertight enough to seal thousands of feet of water depth? If not watertight, why is there no water damage inside. If they were watertight, how did they seal it? - or somehow a small family could build a hundred pyramids while doing wonderous things elsewhere in the world.Wishful thinking I suppose.

---

The Bible has to be true - no one could make all that up.

Well thank you - I now understand in complete confidence. It is so plain now that you explain it. I predict a tithe in my future.you ARE the poster

---

The Bible has to be true - no one could make all that up.

It's amazing the gyrations Flood believers will go through to explain the physical evidence against a global flood - but when confronted with evidence that can't be explained, they completely ignore it.If you were to have your HD reformatted, you wouldn't use any of the O/S that was causing problems, you'd use the original (A&E) and try not to screw it up again - or, you'd develop a whole new operating system. Keeping parts is sure to cause problems again unless you were sure they were good. If things were so bad God should have
1 - stared all over again with a new GoE - this time without the tempting tree and maybe creating Sam and Julie instead.
2 - eliminated only the bad parts - making all the sinners disappear. That sure would have made the good people sit up and notice.

---

The Bible has to be true - no one could make all that up.

Nope - the point is is that if GOD DID do it, there'd be signs that He did it and we wouldn't be having this discussion. Actually I do agree, there would be far better ways of starting over but since this is the method put forth, this is the one we need to deal with.IF He did it after the pyramids, where are the water marks inside the pyramids? Simple question.Or, if He did it before the pyramids were built, who built them? Simple question.For a moment, let's assume the Flood is a theory - in the scientific definition. For it to be true, there cannot be a single piece of evidence that goes against the theory. If evidence were to be found, the theory would have to be adapted to account for that evidence. I've proposed evidence against the theory so either explain how this fits within the theory or adapt the theory to accept the evidence. Simple.This goes for the ToE as well. Evidence that goes against the theory must be accounted for. ANY EVIDENCE! Find something that can't be explained and the theory must by definition be changed. A modern skull in the same strata as a dino's bones would suffice. A formed arrowhead within a dino skeleton would work as well. Any scientist could come up with a million scenarios that would cause serious harm to the ToE.

---

The Bible has to be true - no one could make all that up.

It's amazing how loud the crickets get when the questions get tough. I've read lame brain justifications for the sorting of fossils in the geologic layers and how 900 cubic miles of material can be moved in a year, but as soon as you ask a simple "what came first" question, everyone leaves.

---

The Bible has to be true - no one could make all that up.

My question has nothing to do with faith or going to hell or heaven. It's what came first, the pyramids or the flood. If the pyramids, where is the evidence of water inside, if the flood, who built the 100 or so pyramids in Eqypt post flood? If you want to just go on faith, I could propose that the world was created yesterday and there's nothing that could be said to disprove it.I also have issues with a god who would damn someone forever for looking at physical evidence and asking 'why?'.