RE: Noahic Covenant

From: Glenn Morton (glenn.morton@btinternet.com)
Date: Fri Jun 21 2002 - 08:59:01 EDT

  • Next message: MikeSatterlee@cs.com: "Re: Noahic Covenant"

    >-----Original Message-----
    >From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
    >Behalf Of Vernon Jenkins
    >Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 1:06 PM

    >I have attempted to ascertain your understanding of God's promises to
    >Noah (and,
    >through him, to all mankind) following what you believe to have
    >been a _local_
    >Flood (Gen.8:21-9:17). As far as I am aware your web pages contain
    >no reference
    >to these important matters. However, no doubt you will remember that a
    >significant item in the list is the guarantee that "neither shall
    >all flesh be
    >cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any
    >more be a
    >flood to destroy the earth." (Gen.9:11).
    >
    >That all seems clear enough - but only if the Flood had been _global_ - for
    >manifestly, since Noah's day, there have been many _local_ floods - some of
    >which have wiped out whole communities. May I ask how you as a
    >Christian and
    >local flood theorist make sense of this matter?

    First, I will say this of my views. They do one thing that others
    don't--they don't contradict observation and they make sense of the
    anthropological data. But it is obvious that in the market place of ideas
    that my views are not viewed well. And there is no way to demonstrate that
    the views are actually true. That I won't try to do. But I do know that all
    other views of the flood require ignoring observational data and thus they
    are simply false. Mine probably is also, but as of this moment there isn't
    any scientific data to contradict it. There is merely the lack of
    confirmation which is a different thing. As time goes on I am losing
    interest in this area as other things are more worrying, like the lack of
    any confirmation of the Exodus or much of ancient Jewish history.

    Now to your question. Genesis 6:13 says:
    13And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the
    earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them
    with the earth.

    The word 'earth' is more commonly translated as 'land'. One can argue that
    the ancient hebrews didn't have the concept of planet earth as we do. That
    in itself argues for a local flood. In normal local floods, the land dries
    out and the land isn't destroyed, it is restored. This verse clearly says
    that the land was DESTROYED. Such a scenario as mine or even the Black Sea
    flood, land is actually destroyed--it becomes ocean and is not restored.
    The flesh was destroyed so why not the land? The type of local flood you
    are talking about doesn't destroy the land.

    glenn

    see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
    for lots of creation/evolution information
    anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
    personal stories of struggle
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 21 2002 - 09:13:52 EDT