From: Stephen J. Krogh, P.G. (panterragroup@mindspring.com)
Date: Wed Oct 08 2003 - 18:27:03 EDT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
> Behalf Of Jay Willingham
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 4:47 PM
> To: ASA
> Subject: Re: RATE
>
>
> Jay Willingham wrote:
>
> >> > One could hypothesize that Pangea's division began in the
> time of Peleg
> of
> > > Genesis 10:25, "Two sons were born to Eber: One was named
> Peleg, [ 10:25
> > > [Peleg] means [ division ] . ] because in his time the earth was
> divided;
> > > his brother was named Joktan."
> >
> Stephen J. Krogh, P.G. <panterragroup@mindspring.com> wrote
> >
> > Why would "one" want to? I suppose you could also "postulate" that WWII
> > occurred before the Civil War, but that wouldn't make sense either. BTW,
> > please bottom post.
>
> Jay Willingham wrote:
>
> The history of the last 200 years is a bit easier to prove
> empirically than
> that of millenia ago.
Do you have any physical evidence that suggests that the continents split
after pelegs time, and how recent was Pelegs time? If you ignore the
Geology, then sure. But why would you do that? Maybe you need to look for
another event, say, something that happened at a similar time to the day of
Peleg, rather than something that occurred several million years prior.
> God had laid out what happened in the Bible and I tend to believe his
> testimony. That does not mean my interpretation of it is any better than
> anyone else's.
What was laid out is very sparse. I believe you are straining the text to
fit an interpretation. No where does it say that the continents split apart
at the days of peleg. It is not necessary.
> It also does not mean I blindly believe anyone else's interpretation of
> scientific truth, either.
>
> I am looking for ways of reconciling scientific and Biblical truth.
This is not the way. Maybe try going in a different direction. If you must
find a correlating event in geology, how about lands or peoples being
separated by some sea level change, like the Bearing Strait and the
formation of the Aleutian Islands - all that is left of the land bridge
between north America and Asia. At least that would be a better place to
start.
> What makes sense to man does not necessarily make sense to God.
Oh, really now. God is a god of confusion? How can we tell if God is making
sense or He isn't? I know man's interpretations don't make sense. If you
ignore the creation itself, how can you be sure that your interpretation is
even relevant.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 10 2003 - 12:29:26 EDT