Re: Noah's flood -- worldwide?
George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Mon, 13 Dec 1999 18:22:00 -0500
John W. Burgeson wrote:
>
> I know -- I know -- the hypothesis that the flood was worldwide has been
> rather completely disproved. At least to a 99.999% probability.
>
> Sunday I sat in on a SS class in which the topic of faith was discussed.
> The talk centered around the faith that Noah must have had, etc.
>
> About 20 well-educated, literate, upper middle class men & women. The
> possibility that the flood was anything else than worldwide was never
> mentioned; the story, as a literal reading, was taken for granted.
>
> I kept silent, for several reasons. One was just to immerse myself in a
> cultural discussion where a literal reading of the Bible was taken for
> granted. It was illuminating.
>
> I kept asking myself -- maybe it could all be literally true?
>
> If it is not -- then what is the meaning of the discussion I am listening
> to? Does it have any meaning at all? When the NT speaks of Noah's faith,
> are those empty words?
>
> I don't have any answers to this -- shoot, I don't even have any good
> questions. This I do know -- a literal reading does seem to teach lessons
> in faith that a non-literal reading does not even come close to. What
> does this mean? Beats me.
Why would the faith of Noah's when faced with a global flood have to be
qualitatively different from that with a flood which submerged "only" Mesopotamia - or
the Mediterranean - or the Black Sea - or whatever?
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/