Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Interpretation of Text...Was there a recent global flood?

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty@webtv.net
    ... I have previously written about the utilitarian nature of my Goliath of GRAS . Goliath , with a little effort, could be modified easily enough to deal
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 2, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      David, you wrote:

      > What is your interpretation of Gen. 6-9?

      > Do sound hermeneutical principles
      > indicate that the author meant to say
      > there was a recent global flood which
      > destroyed all land life on the planet
      > (except those in the ark)?

      > Does that conflict with what scientists say?

      > If you believe that happened, where is
      > the evidence of that? If you cannot point
      > to any, but believe it happened, does that
      > imply that God is a deceiver?

      I have previously written about the utilitarian nature of my "Goliath of

      "Goliath", with a little effort, could be modified easily enough to deal
      with the above question(s). I do think I also realize the relevance of
      distinguishing between a simple lack of evidence for a recent global
      flood and evidence that shows that there was no recent global flood.

      The conclusion of the argument would not be that God is a deceiver, but
      merely that one's interpretation of the text is wrong.

      David, do recognize the possibility that your interpretation of the
      text(s), particularly those dealing with "real world" observations,
      might need to be changed?

      David, do you recognize the possibility that sound hermeneutical
      principles might allow for an interpretation of the text to get a not so
      recent creation and to get something other than a recent, global flood?

      I think folks could easily believe in a recent creation and recent
      global flood, based on the scriptures, and without any "scientific"
      evidence to support such interpretations.

      I figure the folks with the problem are those that hold to those
      interpretations of the text and realize there is "scientific" evidence
      contrary to such interpretations.

      What to do?

      Change one's view of scripture?
      Change one's interpretation of scripture?
      Deny the evidence?

      I have to punt alot. I think that is why Todd kinda likes me.

      I don't know so many things that are not so!

      Get it? :o)

      The old time preacher said he was given too much credit. He said the
      reason for that is because he simply didn't know so many things that
      were not so.

      At my age, I probably ought to know more, but I don't.

      Robert Baty
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.