From: Vernon Jenkins (vernon.jenkins@virgin.net)
Date: Fri Oct 31 2003 - 17:30:44 EST
"Why should one insist on a geographically global Flood when it is not
demanded by Scripture, and it presents problems whose alleged solutions
appear to conflict with other statements in Scripture? For example, why
didn't the Flood float the Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets?"
Gordon,
Has it not occurred to you that there may have been no ice sheets in Noah's
day? Global weather patterns might have changed dramatically following the
Flood - as suggested indeed by Gen.5 and 6, which we have already discussed.
Do you have any other biblical examples which present problems for those
believing the Flood to have been global?
In my view, the Lord's reference to the Flood (eg Mt.24:38-39) should have
settled the matter long ago in favour of its universality. This hasn't
happened, but our recent exchanges have exposed a big problem for those
Christians who insist otherwise: the first divine covenant (in which the
rainbow was given as a sign of God's promise never again to destroy all
flesh by the waters of a flood) has to be sacrificed and the character of
God impugned!
Gordon, this is surely your position unless and until you begin to see that
the Mabbul must have been global, and agree that Noah, his family and
menagerie were the only survivors - and hence ancestors to all who have
lived since; remember also, this is what the Lord himself has used as an
illustration when speaking of his second coming.
Vernon
---- Original Message -----
From: "gordon brown" <gbrown@euclid.Colorado.EDU>
To: "Vernon Jenkins" <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 12:05 AM
Subject: Re: Academics who actively support Young Earth Creationism
>
>
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Vernon Jenkins wrote:
>
> > Gordon,
> >
> > Sorry to have misinterpreted your position. But why seek to defend the
> > notion that the Flood was _local_? Is this really a necessary
requirement
> > of an _old earth_ scenario?
>
> Vernon,
>
> I don't see a necessary connection between the two topics. I am sure there
> are people who believe in both an old earth and a geographically global
> Flood. There could conceivably be some who believe in a young earth and a
> local Flood, athough I don't know any.
>
> Since 'erets can be interpreted as either land or earth, it should be no
> surprise that differing views on the extent of the Flood exist. There is a
> scriptural indication of a less than global Flood. The subsiding of the
> Flood is associated with a wind, but wind does not cause sea level to
> decrease.
>
> Why should one insist on a geographically global Flood when it is not
> demanded by Scripture, and it presents problems whose alleged solutions
> appear to conflict with other statements in Scripture? For example, why
> didn't the Flood float the Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets?
>
> Gordon Brown
> Department of Mathematics
> University of Colorado
> Boulder, CO 80309-0395
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 31 2003 - 17:32:34 EST