http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/199710/0295.html
What does "all" mean?
By forcing the world "all" to include, for example, the entire earth with
"all" its inhabitants, consistently so throughout the "whole" Bible, you'll
run into "all" sorts of problems and theological knots.
Literal Interpretations are acceptable but not always. If, for example,
anybody interprets that the descendants of Abraham will be as numerous as the
stars in the heavens, well, we'll need a lot more centuries human existence.
Is this what is was meant? Does God have "feathers" on His "hands"?
Salu2
--------------4400D5AF702661C7AD5E8A9B
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="0295.html"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="0295.html"
Content-Base: "http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/1997
10/0295.html"
<!-- received="Thu Oct 23 15:11:45 1997 EDT" -->
<!-- sent="Thu, 23 Oct 1997 14:09:24 -0700" -->
<!-- name="Arthur V. Chadwick" -->
<!-- email="chadwicka@swac.edu" -->
<!-- subject="Re: Luke and Peter (was E and C)" -->
<!-- id="3.0.1.32.19971023140924.009c87c0@swau.edu" -->
<!-- inreplyto="Luke and Peter (was E and C)" -->
<title>ASA - October 1997: Re: Luke and Peter (was E and C)</title>
<h1>Re: Luke and Peter (was E and C)</h1>
Arthur V. Chadwick (<i>chadwicka@swac.edu</i>)<br>
<i>Thu, 23 Oct 1997 14:09:24 -0700</i>
<p>
<ul>
<li> <b>Messages sorted by:</b> <a href="date.html#295">[ date ]</a><a href="index.html#295">[ thread ]</a><a href="subject.html#295">[ subject ]</a><a href="author.html#295">[ author ]</a>
<!-- next="start" -->
<li> <b>Next message:</b> <a href="0296.html">Craig Rusbult: "Re: T/D #2 (sustenance & concurrence)"</a>
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0294.html">Keith Walker: "Re: T/D #1 (Theistic/Deistic definitions)"</a>
<li> <b>Maybe in reply to:</b> <a href="0289.html">Brian Neuschwander: "Luke and Peter (was E and C)"</a>
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
</ul>
<!-- body="start" -->
<i>>Perhaps the reason A. Chadwick sees recent total global deluge in these</i><br>
<i>>scriptures is more a prior theological imperative, than good exegetical</i><br>
<i>>effort. Sure, these (Lu17 & 2Pe2) are references to the flood, but as </i><br>
<i>>a historical (and prophetic) reference to man's sin and God's judgement,</i><br>
<i>>not a lesson on geology. Where exactly do we find reference to the</i><br>
<i>>comprehensive geological details of the flood A. Chadwick seems to find</i><br>
<i>>there. Perhaps he (and others) can help. </i><br>
<p>
I find clear reference to the flood of Noah in these texts. Any assertion<br>
about the context of the flood would naturally have to refer back to the<br>
original story. The Lukian account does refer to "the flood came and<br>
destroyed them all"<br>
Art<br>
<a href="http://chadwicka.swau.edu">http://chadwicka.swau.edu</a> <br>
<!-- body="end" -->
<p>
<ul>
<!-- next="start" -->
<li> <b>Next message:</b> <a href="0296.html">Craig Rusbult: "Re: T/D #2 (sustenance & concurrence)"</a>
<li> <b>Previous message:</b> <a href="0294.html">Keith Walker: "Re: T/D #1 (Theistic/Deistic definitions)"</a>
<li> <b>Maybe in reply to:</b> <a href="0289.html">Brian Neuschwander: "Luke and Peter (was E and C)"</a>
<!-- nextthread="start" -->
</ul>
--------------4400D5AF702661C7AD5E8A9B--