On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Dehler, Bernie wrote:
> I don't go for the OEC position that it was a local flood, as the NT
> writers seem to think it was global. The only reason for thinking it
> was local is because they are trying to reconcile it with science. Why
> not just go all the way and recognize it as scientifically proven to be
> a fictional event? There is still spiritual meaning in it... that God
> will judge the world because of sin. It's like referring to the story of
> "the boy who cried wolf" to illustrate that lying will mess-up your life
> and relationships. Only the ancients thought the story was actually
> true (for both the creation story and the flood story).
Even many non-Christians have assumed that the flood stories coming from
the Near East were based on some local flood that really happened and have
offered theories about what caused it.
There is Biblical evidence that the Flood was less than global. In the
Hebrew Bible the word 'erets means land much more often than it means
earth. Genesis says that the wind caused the water to recede. Even the
ancients were well aware that the wind blows over the ocean and does not
cause sea level to drop. There were early church fathers who remarked
about this.
Gordon Brown (ASA member)
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Nov 5 11:55:31 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Nov 05 2007 - 11:55:31 EST