> Further to your belief that the Mediterranean basin was the site of the
> Genesis flood - local, by your reckoning - I suggest that Noah and his
> sons would have had every right to feel aggrieved when, acting under
> divine orders, and in obedience having constructed a large sea-going
> vessel over a long period of time, they were to find that the flood they
> had been conditioned to expect turned out to be a mere 'puddle'! The
> logic just doesn't hold up.
Furthermore, Glenn, the Bible says "The water receded steadily from the
earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the water had gone
down, and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to
rest on the mountains of Ararat. The waters continued to recede until
the tenth month, and on the first day of the tenth month the tops of the
mountains became visible." (Genesis 8:3-5)
In your Mediterranean flood model, are the mountains of Ararat in the
Mediterranean basin? Also, if "the waters receded steadily", why is the
basin still brim-full? Also, where are "the tops of the mountains
[which] became visible"?
Bill