Vernon,
Yes, I agree that this is the only exception, but I think that that is
enough to show that this word shouldn't be used as evidence that the Flood
was global.
Gordon Brown
Department of Mathematics
University of Colorado
Boulder, CO 80309-0395
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Vernon Jenkins wrote:
> Gordon,
>
> Thank you for bringing this to my attention. As you say, in the context of Ps.29
> the Hebrew word 'mabbul' does not necessarily refer to Noah's Flood. I observe
> that Matthew Henry says of this psalm: "It is the probable conjecture that David
> penned this psalm at the time of a great storm...". So you may well be right.
> However, if that is the case, I think you would agree that it is the one
> exception to my claim.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Vernon
>
> gordon brown wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Vernon Jenkins wrote:
> >
> > > It must surely follow that the
> > > _mabbul_ was no
> > > local flood. Indeed, scripturally, this Hebrew word is only used of Noah's
> > > flood.
> >
> > This last statement is not obvious. Mabbul is used in Psalm 29:10. Since
> > this psalm is about a thunderstorm passing over Israel, there is no
> > context to imply that this verse refers to the Noachian Flood.
> >
> > Gordon Brown
> > Department of Mathematics
> > University of Colorado
> > Boulder, CO 80309-0395
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 10 2002 - 18:06:27 EDT