Paul writes (guesses?)
>If all we had was Gen 1-11, and I could see as I do that it reflects the
>science of the day and cannot be harmonized with modern science
Paul, I would be able to take you more seriously if you acknowledged
opposing arguments. Let's see if I have your position correct.
The Bible contains a thoroughly detailed flood story.
You (and your "scholars") cry "Historically False!"
This is where I begin to get very confused. It seems that you can
no longer publicly defend your ideas. How much are these ideas worth?
Maybe you could defend your ideas in the past. So what?
Let's leave aside the explosive Gen 1 issues for the time being.
Let's leave aside Gen 2-5.
Let's leave aside Gen 10-11.
In my time on the list I have not seen you spell out your anti-flood
ideas. What, exactly, are they?
Exasperated,
Jim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 09 2002 - 18:51:04 EDT