One difference between my approach and that of other OE's is that I place
the flood early enough so that mankind could be limited. During the past
10,000 years, mankind was spread throughout all the earth and the flood
could not be anthropologically universal. However, that said, one must be
careful of using the word in Genesis 6-9 which is translated as 'earth' as
meaning planet earth. The word is 'eretz' and is more often translated as
'land' or 'country'. The Bible, therefore seems to say that the land was
covered, not the earth.
>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?
I think this is a serious problem for the mesopotamian view and it is why I
have cynically said that any old wet event, from a wet sponge to a river
flood, will serve as the Noachian deluge for some, regardless of how badly
it fits with what the Bible says. And this is why I think we have to match
what the Scripture describes of the Flood.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution