>I will admit to being very discouraged at this time. And I probably took
that discouragement out on you (or you provided a trigger).<
It's not the first time. My best class in law school was "Trigger."
Anyway, sorry for the frustration.
<<I have answered the quesiton 3 times. What more can I say?>>
I apologize, Glenn, for being dim. My focus was on a single verse (Gen.
8:1),and I didn't want to be unfair and ascribe to you a view that you did
not have (I've done that in the past and reaped the wrath of Morton). I
take it now that your answers DO relate to that verse, and we'll move on
from there. I'm really interested in the implications of all this.
Before we go on, a note about hermeneutics. You wrote:
<<And nowhere does the Bible say "God produced the flood miraculously". >>
This is very sloppy, Glenn. Nowhere does the Bible say "Jesus is part of
the Trinity," either. One of the oldest dodges of the religious skeptics is
the "It never says this exactly ploy." But you're not a skeptic, so this is
surprising. One of the reasons we have hermeneutics is that this "defense"
is really unworkable and unreasonable in the real world of textual
revelation.
Another unworkable interpretation is this:
<<You cut out my verses that I noted that God says he brings the rain in
its
season. That is my answer but you choose to cut that out.>>
This is again sloppy. You can't use a general verse to limit a specific.
I'll give you an example. The Bible says "God is Love." But it also says
"God hates what is evil." You cannot use the first to limit the second. The
first is a general statement about the nature of God, but the second is a
specific statement about His attitude toward a kind of behavior. So your
citing of a general verse and importing into a specific context does not
work.
Now, you have stated unequivocally that God did not produce the flood
miraculously (i.e., non-naturally, apart from the normal "system" set in
place). I'll deal with that, but I'm even more perplexed by your idea that
God did not produce the "wind" which cleared up the waters miraculously.
Your view is a little ambiguous because you earlier wrote:
<<God may have caused the wind, but the wind has PHYSICAL effects which can
be searched for (in theory).>>
So what you really may be saying is that the wind WAS caused miraculously,
but any effects of that wind had normal physical effects. This, of course,
is reading something in the text because, (get ready) the text nevers says
"The effects of the wind were normal." OK, I'm being playful with you, but
you get the point. My disagreement is with your second clause. You assume
normal physical effects, but we all know that God doesn't always operate
that way. When he used wind to part the waters of the Red Sea AND to dry
the ground, that was not normal.
My position on all this is that Genesis 8:1 may be a "theological wildcard"
that makes all attempts to force a uniformitarian spin on this past event
fruitless. And it is NOT a logical answer to say "Well, God is deceptive
then" because you can only say that if you preclude God from miraculous
effects. Why would anyone do this?
I hope I've summed up your position and the issues fairly. I'm NOT arguing
geological issues at the moment. I have not examined the data like you
have. However, we all know that data is interpreted, and that our beginning
assumptions color our interpretation. This thread is dealing with
assumptions, and that is something I AM qualified to do.
You asked me this:
<<ANswer my question: Where does it say "The flood was miraculous"?>>
Below is my answer. And please remember, as I've explained above, that it
is bad argumentation to insist on specific wording. If it was a good
method, I'd ask you, "Where does it say 'The Flood was 5.5 million years
ago'?" That gets us nowhere.
Now let's look at the Bible.
THE FLOOD
Whether global or local, the Genesis flood is spoken of as unequivocally
coming from God. It was NOT simply a happenstance of forces already in
place.
Genesis 6:17:
<<And I, behold, I do bring the flood of waters upon this earth, to destroy
all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything
that is in the earth shall die. (AS)
<<And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth (KJV)
<<"And behold, I, even I am bringing the flood of water upon the
earth"(NASB)
<<I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under
the heavens(NIV)
Other Scripture confirms the divine origin:
<<And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a
preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the
ungodly (2 Peter 2:5, KJV)
It really can't be any clearer than that. This is even the teaching of the
Apocrypha!
<<And again in process of time thou broughtest the flood upon those that
dwelt in the world, and destroyedst them. (2 Esdras 3:8)
To deny the miraculous origin of the flood of Genesis is to deny Scripture.
That's why you won't find a single theologian or commentator who takes the
view that the flood was caused by some natural system already in place. To
the contrary, the venerable Matthew Henry states:
<<. Observe the manner of expression: "I, even I, do bring a flood; I that
am infinite in power, and therefore can do it, infinite in justice, and
therefore will do it.'' (1.) It intimates the certainty of the judgment: I,
even I, will do it. That cannot but be done effectually which God himself
undertakes the doing of. See Job 11:10. (2.) It intimates the tendency of
it to God's glory and the honour of his justice. Thus he will be magnified
and exalted in the earth, and all the world shall be made to know that he
is the God to whom vengeance belongs; methinks the expression here is
somewhat like that, Isa. 1:24, Ah, I will ease me of mine adversaries."
THE WIND
It is just as clear that the means of abating the Flood waters was a "wind"
from the hand of God. Look at Genesis 8:1:
<<And God remembered Noah, and all the beasts, and all the cattle that were
with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the
waters assuaged (AS)
<<And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that
was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and
the waters asswaged (KJV)
<<BUT God remembered Noah and all the beasts and all the cattle that were
with him in the ark; and God caused a wind to pass over the earth, and the
water subsided (NASB)
And as Steve Jones recently noted, the word for "wind" here is the SAME as
that for "Spirit" in Genesis 1:2!
If that's not confirmation of miraculous origin, I don't know what is.
This discussion interested me from a purely Scriptural framework. What the
implications are for geology, catastrophism, uniformitarianism, and any
other kind of "ism" is yet to be seen. But from a purely textual standpoint
this is all remarkably clear.
God did it.
Jim Bell