>Giraldo: I do believe the flood was caused by a supernatural intervention
>of God and I'm not looking to science to support this view. Never has
>never will.
>
>That's very smart especially since there is no evidence of such a
>worldwide catastrophic flood.
Glenn:I finally decided to respond to this. While you are correct that
there is
no evidence supporting the concept of a global flood, this does not rule
out
the existence of an existence of an event which matches the Biblical
description. It is just local in nature.
Hmmm, and I thought that the flood described in the bible was worldwide
and so catastrophic that it killed all life outside the Ark.
We agree that mythical stories of big floods, as found in many cultures,
often refer to local floods which happened to be quite catastrophically.
Glenn: "In explanation of this assertion (that the flood was not
necessarily
universal) it needs to be pointed out that the Hebrew 'eres,
translated consistently as 'earth' in our English Bibles, is also the
word for 'land' (e.g. the land of Israel, the land of Egypt).
Perhaps someone should inform the ICR of this <g>
Glenn: 4. This view allows the conservative Christian to have what they
want, which is a historical Bible, but does not require them to reject all
science.
What about the Genesis 6:17 "Look! I am going to cover the earth with a
flood and destroy every living being -everything in which there is the
breath of life. All will die.
Genesis 7:21 Amd all the living things upon the earth perished -birds
domestic and wild animals and reptiles of all mankind - everything that
breathed and lived upon dry land.
It becomes harder to argue that the flood might have been a local one,
according to the bible.