Glenn wrote of the Flood
<< Au contraire, Paul. I don't think they fibbed. I think we mis-translate.
Eretz means land , the land was flooded. It does not mean planet earth,
which is what the YECs hold. Or are you saying that eretz means planet
earth? Unless you hold to that, you don't really have a leg to stand on with
the above criticism. >>
I agree that eretz does not refer to planet earth. But, what land? How about
defining it in context? In context, the "land" that was flooded is the entire
known earth. The mountains that are covered (Gen 7:19) have to include the
the mountains of Urartu (8:4), which was north of Assyria and centered around
Lake Van, thus including today's Mount Ararat. The flooded "land," if
interpreted within its bibical and historical context, extends well into
modern Iran at the eastern edge of their known world (Gen 10:2 - Medes, 22 -
Elam).
<<Obviously you haven't read the book. My landing spot is on the shoreline,
not 1000 meters up. Please come back and argue better when you have actually
done your research. It seems really odd to me that you can make this claim
without even having tried to understand my views. Shame on you. Prior to the
flood, what is now the continental slope would have appeared as mountains.
To Noah's descendants, that wouldn't appear as mountains anymore. They would
have received the report that the ark landed on the mountains (which Noah
recognized) and thus they would have by tradition moved the landing site.
Does this make the account untrue? No. From the base of the Mediterranean
all the way to Mount Ararat itself, one can travel up an increasingly
elevated terrain. It composes one single mountain range, half of which is
now underwater!>>
The last time this came up, you said you were landing the ark around Adana;
and we discussed the fact that Urartu (Ararat) came down close to Adana.
But, Urartu would still be at least 1000 feet higher than the Mediterranean
Sea and probably 1500 feet or more.
The meaning of "Ararat" (Gen 8:4) is NOT determined by the geological extent
of the Ararat range. It refers to the mountains in the country of Urartu;
and the country of Urartu never came down to the shoreline of the
Mediterranean. The author of Gen 8:4 was certainly not thinking of the
Mediterranean shore.
Your theory does not match the biblical account either as to the extent of
the earth that was flooded or the landing place of the ark. In addition,
according to Gen 8:13, 14 the "land" that had been flooded dried off, whereas
the Mediterranean basin (your "land") is still covered with water.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 23 2001 - 02:25:55 EST