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

Gordon,

> > A minor point I know, but Asshur was a _post-diluvian_, so the 'Assyria'
of
> > Genesis 2 is hardly named after him.
>
> But, Vernon, this is exactly the point. The author is writing to
> post-diluvian readers and telling them where these rivers are located. The
> lands named are all named after descendants of Noah. He is using the names
> current at the time of writing so that his readers will understand where
> they could find these rivers. He couldn't have cared less what these
> locales or even these rivers might have been called before the Flood.
>
The strength of this line of reasoning rests entirely on your belief that
the Mabbul was a quiescent affair - that it left the pre-existing
physiography largely intact. But how do you reconcile that belief with the
words of 7:11, "...all the fountains of the great deep were broken up..."?
What is your understanding of this verse? - particularly as applied to the
'local' situation you envisage?

> The ludicrous interpretation that you proposed is a desperate attempt to
> reconcile this passage with the flood geology of George McCready Price,...

Gordon, there is nothing desperate about my developing the clear cut
implications that arise from the conviction that the Mabbul was a global
cataclysm that reshaped the earth's physiography in a big way. What troubles
me is that you still believe the local/quiescent myth despite the evidences
I have raised against it. When do you intend to address (and rebut?) these
matters?

> These rivers flow on top of sediments six miles thick.

Accepting your word for this, it does appear to represent an insurmountable
problem for one holding my views. However, you appear to have insurmountable
problems also. Clearly, we shall need to pool our wits to resolve the
dilemma.

Finally, let me thank you for the references provided in these emails.
Regarding the parting of the Red sea: the text of Ex.14:21-22 speaks of the
creation of a _channel_ with walls of water on _both sides_. I find it
impossible to believe that such a situation could be induced _naturally_.
Would you agree?

----- Original Message -----
From: "gordon brown" <gbrown@euclid.colorado.edu>
To: "Vernon Jenkins" <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 1:09 AM
Subject: Re: Is there a Plan B? (was: So we're all related!)

>
> On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Vernon Jenkins wrote:
>
> > A minor point I know, but Asshur was a _post-diluvian_, so the 'Assyria'
of
> > Genesis 2 is hardly named after him.
>
> But, Vernon, this is exactly the point. The author is writing to
> post-diluvian readers and telling them where these rivers are located. The
> lands named are all named after descendants of Noah. He is using the names
> current at the time of writing so that his readers will understand where
> they could find these rivers. He couldn't have cared less what these
> locales or even these rivers might have been called before the Flood.
>
> Gordon Brown
> Department of Mathematics
> University of Colorado
> Boulder, CO 80309-0395
>
>
Received on Wed Oct 27 16:31:57 2004