Vernon wrote:
<< In 2Pet.3:16 the Apostle issues a dire warning to those who, to satisfy
their own agendas, 'wrest' the scriptures. Gordon, if you (and others)
insist on the Flood being local, then - duck and dive as you will - you
cannot avoid the charge that you are guilty of manipulating God's Word. >>
I agree with Burgy that this is an improper statement especially from a
spiritual point of view .
I do not accept the idea that because "earth" can mean "land" or "country"
that it can have this meaning in the Flood account. The context of the Flood
account demands a universal Flood. At the same time, 2Peter specifically
emphasizes the creation of the earth out of water and destroyed by water,
which goes back directly to Gen 1:2-10 and 7:11. And, these verses clearly
reflect the cosmology of the times: a flat earth floating on a sea which came
up through the fountains of the Deep and a solid firmament which allowed a
goodly portion of the sea above it to pour down through the windows of
heaven.
To avoid wresting Scripture and manipulating it for private agendas, the
historical-grammatical meaning of the text must be maintained; and that means
one cannot read a global, i.e., spherical earth, into the account. If one
upholds the idea that Gen 1-11 is a revelation from God of the nature of the
universe rather than an accommodation to the views of the times, then
consistency demands that such a person affirm the solid firmament with its
sea above it as existing even yet today; for Gen 8:2 and Psa 148:4 infer that
not all of the sea above the firmament came down at the time of the Flood.
If one is not willing to maintains the biblical cosmology, one cannot deny to
others equal freedom in dealing with the biblical text.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 17 2001 - 14:28:31 EST