The local flood theories further assert that the terminology describing the extent of the Flood should be interpreted in a relative and not absolute universal sense. A number of studies provides a growing body of evidence for diluvial catastrophism as an alternative to conventional long-age geology (see Coffin and Brown 1983 Roth 1985, 1986a, 1988 Whitcomb 1988 Baumgardner 1994a,b). Since the scientific argumentation is not the subject of this article, I can only suggest that these problems are not insurmountable, although much more study is needed. The limited flood theories rest primarily on scientific arguments that present seemingly difficult geological, biological, and anthropological problems for a universal flood. Thus according to the biblical writers, far from being a non-historical, symbolical, or mythical account written only to teach theological truths, the Flood narrative is intended to accurately record a real, literal, historical event.įor evangelical Christians who take seriously the biblical record and accept the historicity of the Flood account, the question still remains whether the event described is to be taken as a local, limited flood or a universal, world-wide cataclysm. The historical occurrence of the Flood is part of the saving/judging acts of God, and its historicity is assumed and essential to the theological arguments of later biblical writers employing Flood typology (see Davidson 1981, p 326-327) more on this point later. Walter Kaiser analyzes the literary form of Genesis 1-11 and concludes that this whole section of Genesis must be taken as "historical narrative prose" (Kaiser 1970).Ī number of references in the book of Job may allude to the then-relatively-recent Flood (Job 9:5-8 12:14-15 14:11-12 22:15-17 26:10-14 28:9 38:8-11 see Morris 1988, p 26-30). The use of the genealogical term tôl edô t ("generations," "account") in the Flood story (6:9) as throughout Genesis (13 times, structuring the whole book), indicates that the author intended this story to be as historically veracious as the rest of Genesis (Doukhan 1978, p 167-220). In the literary structure of the Flood story (see Shea 1979), the genealogical frame or envelope construction (Genesis 5:32 and 9:28-29) plus the secondary genealogies (Genesis 6:9-10 and 9:18-19) are indicators that the account is intended to be factual history. Three major positions are taken: (1) the traditional, which asserts the universal, world-wide, nature of the Deluge (2) limited or local flood theories, which narrow the scope of the Flood story to a particular geographical location in Mesopotamia and (3) non-literal (symbolic) interpretation, which suggests that the Flood story is a non-historical account written to teach theological truth.Īgainst this third position, the non-historical, we must note the evidences within the biblical account affirming the historical nature of the Flood. One of the most controversial aspects of the Flood narrative concerns the extent of the Genesis Flood. Our apologies for any inconvenience this might cause. PLEASE NOTE: Unfortunately, we are unable to reproduce all of the special accent marks that were present in our printed version of the Hebrew transliteration. ![]() The author summarizes twenty-two lines of biblical evidence including terminological, thematic, contextual, grammatical-syntactical, literary-structural, logical-conceptual, theological, canonical, and typological which support the universality of the Genesis Flood. ![]() The thesis of this study is that only the traditional interpretation which posits a literal, universal, world-wide Genesis Flood does full justice to all the relevant biblical data. For those who accept a recent creation week of six literal consecutive, twenty-four-days, a universal Flood is necessary to explain the existence of the geologic column. ![]() The extent of the Genesis Flood has been vigorously debated by biblical scholars. John Nevin Andrews Professor of Old Testament InterpretationĪndrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan Download PDF JBIBLICAL EVIDENCE FOR THE UNIVERSALITY OF THE FLOOD by
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |