Hi Petri,
We have a few 'Flood' topics at the moment, but regardless of that your opening post needs a bit of wor if it were to be considered for promotion.
Let me give a few examples of where I see a problem:
Certain people who believe in the theory of evolution and do not believe that the Flood had ever taken place have often regarded the Flood as a mere legend.
There is a lot wrong with this. You never say who these 'certain people' are, you don't consider that perhaps some creationists may not believe in the Flood, and you suggest that the Flood was never doubted before the theor of evolution was proposed. The first paragraph of your post is nothing except your opinion.
Then you say:
However, it is good to ask whether the Flood really did take place.
Why is it good to ask if the Flood took place?
If we were to make practical observations of the ground and the fossils found therein, and traditional folklore, they would refer quite often to the Flood.
Sorry, but neither the ground nor the fossil record can refer to the Flood. These remains are mute and are only given a context by the mind of the person examining the remains, so another error. Also, world Flood legends are so diverse that they contradict each other.
These indicate that a large mass destruction had taken place in the immediate past.
No date, no suggestion of what caused the destruction?
The following passages will examine these different sources of information, which refer to the Flood.
You need to summarise the link because there is too much information in it. It is unreasonable, and against forum guidelines to ask members to wade through all that text. You should limit your proposal to two or three points at first then discussion will develop from there.
It isn't going to fly in this condition, it doesn't look as if you have put any effort into this at all. Maybe you could join in one of the already open threads on the Flood.
™ Version 4.2
