Re: Is there a Plan B? (was: So we're all related!)

From: gordon brown <gbrown@euclid.colorado.edu>
Date: Tue Oct 12 2004 - 17:49:04 EDT

Vernon,

I don't have time to respond to all your assertions, but I would like to
ask you two questions.

1. How does wind cause sea level to fall? (Gen. 8:1)

2. What is the meaning of 'erets in Gen. 8:9? (According to Gen. 8:5
mountains were visible at this time.)

> 2) From an evolutionary standpoint, our current understanding of geology
> demands that the Flood be accepted as _local_ rather than _global_.

You always seem to want to label any viewpoint opposed to your own as
being evolutionary. There are many Christians who are old-earth and
local-flood proponents who are not Darwinian evolutionists. In fact, when
I think of the Christian publications that I know about that are devoted
to the subject of the age of the earth and universe, most of those
supporting an old earth and universe were written by people who are
opposed to evolution.

> 4) However, it should be noted that New Testament commentators when
> referring to this event invariably use the Greek word 'kosmos' - meaning
> 'earth', or 'world order', but not 'land' (eg 2Pet.2:5, 3:6; Heb.11:7).

The word 'cosmos' in the New Testament seldom if ever refers to something
physical. The usual word for the physical earth is 'ge'. That goes for the
Peter and Hebrews passages also. It is generally the people who inhabit
the planet along with their society who are the world.

You fail to distinguish between an anthropologically global and a
geographically global Flood. The various arguments you use could at best
support the idea of an anthropologically universal Flood, which does not
necessarily imply a geographically global one.

> No, Gordon. Assuming the Flood to be _local_ ultimately makes nonsense of
> the whole scenario. Do evolutionists and others have a 'Plan B' to fall back
> on now that _global_ appears to be the only show in town? It appears that a
> complete revision of the geological interpretation of earth history is
> called for - or, otherwise, for the Christian, the removal of Chapters 6-9
> of Genesis from his/her Bible!

You seem to want to replace the discoveries of geology by the Seventh Day
Adventist version of the Flood, which is inconsistent with a
straightforward reading of the Scriptures.

Gordon Brown
Department of Mathematics
University of Colorado
Boulder, CO 80309-0395
Received on Tue Oct 12 17:51:04 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Oct 12 2004 - 17:51:05 EDT