Re John Burgeson's question, and not having a strong background in OE interpretations
(though as a PhD chemist, I find it exceptionally hard to accept YEC), I echo John's
question. Gen 6:7 states that God, in His lamenting that He had made mankind would wipe
"mankind whom I have created, from the face of the earth--men and animals, and creatures
move along the ground, and birds of the air--I am grieved that I have made them." (NIV)
Do OE interpretations accept this as being all mankind from the Mesopotamian region only?
If so, (1) were there other homo sapiens (i.e. homonids with spirits, making them "in Our
image" beings) elsewhere who were not killed in the flood? (2) Were there other "earlier"
homonids elsewhere who were not killed in the flood? (3) What, also, of animal species
outside this region? (And no, Glen, I haven't had the chance to read your texts yet,
though I'm working toward them!) Regarding the last 3 questions, if there were "others"
outside this region who were not killed by the flood, are we to accept that they were more
righteous/less deserving of God's judgment? If so, why do we hear nothing in scripture of
them?
Anticipating stimulating responses, I am...
Howard Meyer
psiigii@erols.com
George Murphy wrote:
> 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/