>Recently, we've seen some naturalistic cavils about Noah, the animals, the
>ark, etc. It should be pointed out that God was communicating, intervening and
>sustaining during this time. To assume purely naturalistic explanations is an
>illegitimate, a priori assumption--for either side.
>
>Noah walked with God. (Gen. 6:9).
>>God spoke to Noah. (6:13, 17)
>>God gave Noah inside information (6:14); and detailed instructions on how to
>build the ark (6:15-16).
>>God pledged covenant with Noah (6:18), something he had only done once before
>in human history, in the Garden.
>God ordered Noah to pack food (6:21)....
>>God brought the animals to Noah (Noah didn't go out and fetch them). Another
>miracle. (7:9, 15)
>And GOD shut NOAH in (7:16). This is an important fact. God was the one
>sustaining the ark!
>
>All of the above is ample evidence of God's miraculous involvement with Noah,
>the ark, and the Flood. So why waste time trying to calculate urine samples
>and dinner menus? God knew what he was doing when he got involved and stayed
>involved. He usually does.
>
Usually? How about always. Jim's right. My concern with some of the
Scientific Creationists is that they seem intent on providing a totally
naturalistic explanation of the flood. If the flood occurred according to
the interpretatons of the Scientific Creationists, then it would seem that
numerous miraculous events occurred, many of which are documented in
Scripture. Why claim otherwise?
Bill Hamilton | Vehicle Systems Research
GM R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX)
hamilton@gmr.com (office) | whamilto@mich.com (home)