RE: Kline article in PSCF (D. Kidner on Adam)

Fred Phelps (
07 Apr 96 14:35:00 -0700

Glenn Morton writes:

>Davis Young writes:
>"2. The failure of literalism and concordism suggests tht the Bible
>may not be expected to provide precise 'information' or 'data'
>about the physical structure and history of the planet or cosmos."
>Davis A. Young, Scripture in the Hands of Geologists, Part Two,"
>Westminster Theological Journal, 49, 1987,p. 294
As a missionary, I need something to tell people. I enjoy the
discussion, but it seems to me that we are going back and forth talking
about concordism and complimentarianism philosophically. What I want
is answers to the following:

1) Does the Bible teach that there was an historical flood? Was it
local or global? If yes and local, is there ANY scenario that is
POSSIBLE or is the Bible wrong? I am reading Glenn's scenario and must
say that at least I do not dismiss it out of hand! I would prefer a
local flood (actually I wouldn't mind global if it had any chance
scientifically) sometime in the
last 10,000 years and somewhere near the middle east. It seems to me
that a local recent (as opposed ot 5.5 million year ago)
flood has the best chance of being right, but it is VERY
hard to believe that the Bible's description is not exaggerated. Can
ANYONE find a way to say that without endangering inerrancy, or at
least a high view of Scriptural authority? Or is our best current
position one of
"We have no idea how to reconcile the flood accounts with science. It
looks like they are in conflict, but I'm not giving up the faith
because of what I've seen God do in my life or because I'm convinced of
the resurrection (or whatever other basis you have for your faith)."

These are fair questions and saying that "the Bible does not
give precise information or data" does not help, unless you can
convince me that the relevant passages are largely non-historical. Can
anyone do this for the flood passages?

2) Was there a Tower of Bable event? If not, or if a literal reading
greatly exaggerates what happened, can you show me why I should not
read it literally?

3) Was there an historic Adam and fall? When and where did he live (at
least within one million years and 1000 miles!) If you cant tell me
when and where can you at least come up with one possible scenario?

On this question I am fairly happy with Kidner's view recently posted.
I think the objections some have raised can be answered.

I want to be honest. I have no answers for the flood (other than
which I am far from convinced about) and I prefer not to live
(especially as a missionary) this way. I do not need all the answers,
but if we can not even find ONE POSSIBLE way to reconcile early Genesis
with the findings of science then life is hard.

I repeat that giving reasons for a non-literal reading of Gen 1-11
would be a possible reconciliation, but at least one theologian of note
needs to agree with that accessment. In fact, I think this has been
done for Gen 1 and perhaps much of Gen 2 and 3, but beginning in
chapter 4 it sure looks like history to me.

Note to Glenn, (for all to read!)

I love you in the Lord and sympathise with what you are saying. But
you are hammering every other position but your own and not very many
people yet believe your postion. Some lurkers may be feeling cornered
and ready to give up in despair and slide into atheism. You yourself
were not far from that recently. I have had my doubts too. For
everyone's benefit, I am creating another post on why I did not give up
in despair.

Fred Phelps