First of all, I want to thank Mr. Morton et al; for generating enough
curiosity in me through their arguments that I went and review some
concepts that I hadn't look at for about a decade.
After doing some research, I'll change the wording of some statements.
These new words will reflect some new ideas.
However, the principle behind the conviction, at least mine, won't change.
If anything it got stronger. Briefly stated, I didn't found any mountain
of evidence to show me that evolution was a collection of irrefutable
facts.
What I encountered was rather a collection of assumptions knit together
with a strong dose of faith. I found out that all still comes down to
belief. And belief speaks of faith and trust. Who or what do you believe
and where do you put your trust.
My second motive for writing this message has to do with the loose,
surprisingly often and erroneous (whether willfully or not isn't for me to
say) interpretation of The Scriptures by some writers in this list.
Although I don't doubt their expertise in their areas of endeavor, I do
question their Biblical knowledge and hermeneutical skills.
Biblical hermeneutics is the science and the art of Biblical
interpretation. It is a science because it is concerned with principles
within an ordered system. It is meant to derive and classify the
principles necessary for the proper scriptural interpretation.
It is also an art because it is concerned with applying the principles
derived. Because of the nature and claims The Bible makes about itself,
these principles can't be mechanically applied but need the skill of the
interpreter. Not a skill to willfully deceive but by adhering to the
linguistic, cultural, geographical and historical gaps being able to
explain in plain language the meaning.
The primary purpose of Biblical hermeneutics is to ascertain what God has
said in the Scriptures and to determine its meaning. We derive no benefit
from the fact that God has spoken, unless we understand what is meant by
what He said.
The Bible is The Book of Truth. No amount of 'Scientific Theory' can ever
explain away scriptural fact.
The Bible is:
1. Enduring -'Forever O Lord, Your word is settled in
Heaven' Psl. 119:8
'Heaven and Earth shall pass away but My
words shall not pass away' Math. 24:35
2. Inerrant -'All scripture is God breathed' 2 Tim. 3:16
'Every word of God is pureDo not add'
Prov. 30:5-6
'scripture cannot be broken.' John 10:35
'Let God be true, though every man be found
a liar' Rom. 3:4
3. Clear God's wisdom is 'righteousness; nothing
crooked or perverse is in it'
All His words are 'plain and right to those
who find Knowledge' Prov. 8:8-9
Now about the flood.
1. What is the oldest living thing on Earth today? How
about the Bristlecone pine trees in the White Mountains
bordering California and Nevada. These rare and rugged
trees have been growing for about 5000 years. By all
indications, these trees will continue to grow for
another ten centuries unless something catastrophic
will occur. But why don't we find a grove of trees
somewhere in the world dating back say 6000, 8000,
10000 or even 15000 years? It is almost as if these
trees were planted on virgin Earth around 5000 years ago.
2. What about human population? If man have been on this
planet for a million years, why is population explosion
only recently becoming such a problem? If today we
believe this million-year theory and we were to have
families worldwide averaging 2.5 children (yielding
annual population growth of 1/2%) the Earth will have
3,000 billion humans. But what is the population
today? Using the same averages and planetary
population growth and taking the planet population of 5
billion we find that only the descendants of one family
will take a little over 4,000 years to arrive at our
current numbers. And let me add that these rates are
about one fourth of the current growth rates.
3. Sir Charles Leonard Woolley in 1923 was in charge of an
American and British team of archaeologists that set
out to find and dig up Ur of The Chaldees (Abraham's
birth place). During the sixth digging season the team
encountered some very peculiar facts when they thought
that virgin soiled had been reached. He carefully
prodded the ground on the floor of the shaft and found
pure clay. Only water could put that type of clay
there. They dug nearly another 10 feet before the clay
stopped. When they found dirt again, they expected it
to be virgin soil void of any human artifacts. But
they found more evidence of human habitation. More
pottery, jars, bowls that perfectly matched the ones
uncovered before the 10 feet of clay. That day, a
telegram from Mesopotamia flashed with the words 'We
found the flood'. This was headline news in Britain
and the US.
4. Throughout the planet, one finds stories of a worldwide
flood. For example the Chibcha Indians who live in
what it is today Colombia in South America tell the
story of Bacata. Where a big flood filled a valley.
Suddenly this god, Bacata, appeared and touched the
rocks, which were broken creating the Tequendama
Falls emptying the valley of water. This valley today
is where Colombia's capital, Bogota is located. This
city sits 8400 feet above sea level.
Last two points are going to deal with The Bible itself. To obtain a
sound interpretation, one must avoid the tendency to impose one's own
ideas upon Scripture. For instance, I noticed that Gen. 6:17 was
mentioned as example of how translators used land, earth and ground for
the same Hebrew word.
But why did the interpreter violated the contextual principle (principle
by which the interpretation of any verse is determined upon a
consideration of its context) and stopped at this verse? A little further
in verse 19 we read 'They rose (the waters) greatly on the earth, and all
the HIGH MOUNTAINS under THE ENTIRE HEAVENS were covered. The waters rose
and COVERED THE MOUNTAINS to a depth of MORE THAN TWENTY FEET'. This is
the NIV text.
There isn't a doubt in the Scriptural narrative of how high and where the
waters arose. Moreover, verse 23 leaves no doubt as to who perished on
this event 'EVERY LIVING THING ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH was wiped out; men
and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of
the air were wiped from the earth.'
The last point has to do with rain. According to Scripture, rain as we
know it today didn't happen until after the flood. In Gen. 2:5 'for The
Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the
ground' Not until Noah do we find rain again Gen. 7:4. But the water
that poured from heaven was no common storm. The Biblical description in
Gen.7:11 'all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the
floodgates of heaven were open. And rain fell on the earth forty days and
forty nights'.
We find some very key words in this small passage. Deep is found in Gen.
1:2 describing the state of the earth when it was all underwater.
Floodgates of heaven are used in Mic.3:10 in the only part of Scripture
that God challenged men to put Him to the test. And the implication here
is that is going to be a huge quantity. Forty speaks of generations. Day
of light, night of darkness. Space and time doesn't allow me to knit all
of these together so I leave this portion with the oldest and most
regarded adage of Biblical hermeneutics: 'Scripture interprets Scripture'.
Lastly, we find that clouds aren't mentioned in the Bible until after this
deluge takes place. And the clouds are associated with the rainbow. The
symbol by which God establishes the Noahic covenant and promises never to
use a flood to destroy all life on the planet.
So we end up with the fact that to believe Glenn's growing reasons of why
the flood is not global, one must reject Biblical portions under the
'belief' that they are wrong. In other words, if one believes Glenn's
reasons, the Bible is wrong. If one believes the Bible flood description
then Glenn's reasons are wrong.
It isn't the first time in history that this situation arises.
Sorry Glenn, I don't believe your statement of 'Why the Flood is not
Global'. I don't doubt your sincerity and your commitment to your work.
But it will take more than sincerity and commitment to make me believe the
Bible is wrong, specially with the hermeneutical approach used.
Best Regards,
Dario Giraldo
Lacey, Washington