Re: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over floods... and biblical interpretation

Dick.
It seems to me that you argue whichever view fits at the time. For
example, Genesis 1 uses the cosmology of ANE, with a solid firmament with
sun, moon and stars on the terrestrial side and water on the side away
from the earth. How does that make the apology for monotheism invalid? In
Genesis 2, that Adam named the animals implies that they had no names
previously, though you claim that the Mesopotamian civilization had risen
earlier. The Bible says that there was no help for him while you posit
tens of thousands of people living in the valley, lots of women, with
more elsewhere on earth.

How does the notion that Noah simply stayed aboard the ark for two
seasons work? I can imagine him stuck on a sand bar where there was at
least an area of the ark from which he could drop a bucket to draw water
for the creatures aboard. This would not help the food problem unless he
could barter with the locals. But Mesopotamia has a distinct lack of
wood. Would a mass of wood as big as the ark not be salvaged by the
locals?

Floods flow downstream, with increased speed as there is more water. If
the ark were in the current, it would head for the Persian Gulf. If it
got into an area where water overflowed the banks, the water would be
ponding and going nowhere. So how did the ark head upstream to the area
of Ararat? Or is this an inaccuracy that does not disturb the message?
Dave (ASA)

On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:44:03 -0400 "Dick Fischer"
<dickfischer@verizon.net> writes:
Hi Bernie:

You raise a valid point, one that I have asked myself for many years.
The broad question is whether or not there was a flood, and if there was,
when was it and what was the extent? I think that question can be
answered readily. The question you raise is the accuracy of the account.
 Did the Bible writer get all his facts straight? If there are mistakes
in the narrative, are there enough to discount or disbelieve the entire
narrative in Genesis altogether?

Compared to the parallel flood accounts the one in Genesis is the odd one
out on the subject of duration. Parallel accounts describe a week long
voyage while Noah’s trip in Genesis takes a year. But whatever the case,
mistake or not, scribal error or not, that is no reason to jump to some
other position that can’t be defended by anything.

Rainy seasons are annual events in Iraq occurring in the spring when the
snow melts on the mountains in the north and surges down the rivers on to
the flat plain that is southern Mesopotamia. If there were two back to
back flood episodes, and Noah chose to remain in the boat to ride out two
rainy seasons, that could take a year and might explain the long voyage
in Genesis versus the short voyage in the parallel accounts. I’m only
throwing that out as one possible explanation.

So, say my guess is wrong. In court trials where witnesses give their
accounts of a crime they have seen rarely are all testimonies exactly the
same. Perspectives differ, perceptions aren’t the same, memories vary.
Yet the judge or jury must decide guilt or innocence on the totality of
evidence presented. Conflicting testimonies are normal and to be
expected.

I agree the primary focus should be on the theological lessons based upon
the historical narrative. If the historical account was a fabrication,
however, would that not also call into question the theological lessons
derived therefrom?

Dick Fischer, GPA president
Genesis Proclaimed Association
"Finding Harmony in Bible, Science and History"
www.genesisproclaimed.org

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Dehler, Bernie
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 12:22 PM
Cc: ASA
Subject: RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over floods... and biblical
interpretation

Hi Dick- Scientifically, the problem with a local flood is that there’s
no way the water could be contained for a year. You need a bowl shape to
do that, and there is no bowl shape. How were the rivers dammed-up? If
you believe in a flood, how long do you think Noah was floating on an
ark- for about a year as the bible indicates?

Ancient history is full of myths, so it would be no surprise to find
another. However, the Lamoureux position, which I represent, says the
history and science of the Bible is incidental- the theology is what the
Bible is good for. It uses the science and history of the day to give
theology.

Don’t worry about pile-up’s on me- I usually find them humorous if they
happen ;-)

…Bernie

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Dick Fischer
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 8:55 AM
To: 'Merv Bitikofer'
Cc: ASA
Subject: RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over floods... and biblical
interpretation

I don't mean to "pile on" anybody, especially a brother in Christ. It’s
just that I feel a little frustration, like a rancher whose barn catches
on fire and as soon as he pulls the horses out they run back in again.
Admittedly the evidence for Adam that I’ve talked about on this list for
many years now, while tantalizing, is less than conclusive. But the
total evidence for a flood in southern Mesopotamia around 2900 BC is
overwhelming in my judgment.

As for a global flood, the Nephilim (giants) in Gen. 6:4 are ancestral to
the Anakim in Num. 13:33. If the Pentateuch itself tells us there are
flood survivors then the flood cannot be global nor did the writer(s) of
Genesis think it was. Add to that the Sumerian king list that enumerates
pre-flood kings and post-flood kings and the absence of any geological
evidence, and that should settle it. End of debate.

The flood was local to the immediate area and judgment on Noah’s kin.

Dick Fischer, GPA president
Genesis Proclaimed Association
"Finding Harmony in Bible, Science and History"
www.genesisproclaimed.org

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Merv Bitikofer
Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 10:49 PM
To: asa
Subject: Re: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over floods... and biblical
interpretation

Well, since Dick may have started a "let's pile on Bernie" activity, I
don't want to feel left out; so I challenge you, Bernie on a different
point. Why does attempting to be faithful to both the Bible and science
weaken the testimony of both? If somebody's *understanding* of the Bible
becomes clearly seen to be false, (whether shown by other deeper
Biblical insights, science, or anything else) then that *understanding*
should be shed for the millstone it is, and the remaining faith, if it
ever was true, should get clearer focus with another false prop removed.
Pity the one, though, who was hoisted up using a false prop but hasn't
yet crawled off it onto a sturdier foundation. How many of us have been
vulnerable like that? --I swallow my own flippancy. The only sure
foundation I ever had is Christ.

--Merv
(from the top-of-the-head stuff is fun, Bernie, if you don't mind being
picked on and having it picked apart later.)

Dehler, Bernie wrote:
>
> Here's my take, from the top of my head:
>
> Global flood:
>
> Strength: The Bible appears to be reporting real history, and this
> interpretation treats it as such.
>
> Weakness: Almost completely ignores evidence from modern science.
>
> Local Flood:
>
> Strength: It tries to integrate the story of the Bible with scientific
> evidence.
>
> Weakness: Tries to be faithful to both the Bible and science and in so
> doing, weakens the testimony of both.
>
> No Flood:
>
> Strength: Most closely aligns to scientific evidence from geology and
> biology.
>
> Weakness: Destroys faith in the Bible as “inerrant” in matters of
> history and science.
>
> …Bernie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]
> On Behalf Of gordon brown
> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 2:04 PM
> To: asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over floods... and biblical
> interpretation
>
> On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Dehler, Bernie wrote:
>
> > I'm going to be debating Noah's Ark- global flood, local flood, or no

> flood. I'm taking the no flood position.
>
> >
>
> > Curious-
>
> >
>
> > What all do you think would be the best argument for each position?
>
> >
>
> > Please keep your answers short- no essays.
>
> >
>
> > Info on my event:
>
> > http://www.meetup.com/sciligion/calendar/9503416/
>
> >
>
> > ...Bernie
>
> >
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
____________________________________________________________
Study online and boost your career with a Bachelor's Degree.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTL9zbiTADtc8TXbtfNK47Jr3mWu3mIyAqtnoAUaA6Gzl9H3QzCwcY/

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Apr 7 19:22:16 2009