Glenn writes:
<<I would agree with you that if the Flood was miraculous, then
uniformitarianism, physical law, or congressional law is useless.>>
A tad overstated, of course. Physical laws are useful, as is current
geology. I agree with you about Congress, however.
But the point is not the norm (it never is when one discusses miraculous
events). So the fact remains that trying to impose a uniformitarian model
upon a past miracle is an exercise in futility.
<< Could God have done everything miraculously? Yes. Did He? I
think not because he would have to arrange things so exactingly that it
would have the appearance of a deception. >>
Here is where you lose me. Appearance of deception to WHOM? Only those who
have a preconceived standard about what they expect to find! But that is
not a valid premise, so the whole house of cards falls.
<<If you have a murder case and the
guilty party plants the gun in your house dribbles a bit of your blood at
the scene and uses a car with tires identical to yours, you would call that
a deception. This is the type of activity that God must have engaged in
to
make the geologic column look as it does.>>
But you are still deciding what the standard of deception is. If God
performs a miracle, which is by definition outside the natural, how is that
a deception? It only is if you demand that God make everything happen
according to a set standard. But where does it say God HAS to make his
miraculous events look like anything other than what they are? It seems you
are presuming, in a big way.
<<And if we can't
trust what he does in the natural world, then how can I trust Him when He
tells me to believe on His son and I will be saved?>>
The point is you MUST trust him, even when his answers are not what you
desire, expect or "demand." I find it fascinating that you call a work of
God deceptive simply because, at a point in history, it was not "natural."
Just what do you think a miracle is?
To put it bluntly, this standard can deny Christ rose from the dead
because, well, how can we believe something that does not follow the
natural?
<<I don't think that it says that the flood and drying were miraculous. >>
Then what does Gen. 8:1 mean when it says " God made a wind to pass over
the earth"? Was this a natural or supernatural event?
Jim