>...during the time that the Mediterranean was a desert the Tigris and
Euphrates (or more correctly, the paleoTigris and paleoEuphrates) emptied
into the basin! The uplift that created the Dead Sea Rift didn't occur
until the Pliocene. You need to pay attention to geologic changes with time.
>I don't see the name 'Persian Gulf' or its ancient equivalents in the
Bible. Can you point them out to me in the Genesis 2 passage? You are
assuming that it had to be there at the Persian Gulf. YOu may be correct,
you may be incorrect.
Comment 1: While the Persian Gulf may not be mentioned explicitly, the
Tigris and Euphrates are. They currently, and for the past 10,000 years,
empty into the Persian Gulf. So did two other rivers during a short span
known as the 'Wet Neolithic'. The time of the Ubaids.
Comment 2: As Dick pointed out, ancient cultures other than the the
one founded by Abraham have names of kings that sound like 'Adam'. One
must conclude that the names spead either through descent or contact.
Comment 3: Both Sumerian and Akkadian cultures recorded genealogies
similar in style to the genealogies in Genesis.
If we use 'consilience' as a subjective criteria of judgment, the latter
three comments are consilient. A paleo-Tigris is not consilient with the
second comment.
Glenn wrote:
>If you try to match geologic ages to events in Genesis 1, you will end up
in a hopeless muddle.
And in response to my attempt to describe 'Genesis 1 as vision' replied:
>I am sorry but that didn't make a lot of sense. Sounded to me like
that web page where you can get a post-modernist paper written on demand.
Can you make this more clear? I fail to see how Genesis 1 points to our
modern view of evolution. I do think it points to evolution, just not our
modern view of it. So tell me how it points to our modern view?
So let me try again. What epochs might correspond to each Genesis day?
And once the epoch is identified, what phrases do not match the
correspondence.
The formation of the solar system corresponds to day one. The phrase
that does not fit is "God called the light day ... " Who is God talking
to? This phrase is different from the others, since it is an act of
naming.
The accretion of the planet earth corresponds to day two. The phrase
that does not fit is "God called the firmament the heavens ...".
The formation of the earliest continents corresponds to the start of
day three. The phrase that does not fit is "God called the dry land
earth ..."
The founding of life that was photosynthetic (vegetative) and whose
reproduction was mediated by DNA (bearing according to its kind) corresponds
to day three. The phrases that do not fit are "God created the plants
bearing seed ...". And these really don't fit.
Now, if we look at the 'phrases that do not fit', we can see that they
do resemble the corresponding epoch, but not as visualizations. Rather,
they resemble the importance of the corresponding epoch to humans. If
you were going to try to answer the question 'How do I experience each
of the epochs decribed above?', the Genesis 'phrases that do not fit'
provide evocative and accurate answers. For example, my everyday
experience of grasses and fruit trees points to and is a consequence of
the earliest forms of life that grew and reproduced in a vegetative manner.
That is how I get the name 'two tiered' resemblance. Visualization and
meaning.
I hope this clarifies my previous comments.
Ray