> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On
> Behalf Of Robert Schneider
> Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 4:54 PM
> To: gordon brown
> Cc: Asa@Calvin. Edu
> Subject: Re: Black Sea Flood
> Your question prompts my memory and what I wrote below was incorrect. The
> YEC argument, e.g., in Ken Ham's _The Lie: Evolution_, is that Jesus
> accepted the book of Genesis as literal truth, and "on at least six
> occasions, Jesus Christ either quoted from or referred to some aspect of
> Genesis 1 through 11." The references that Jesus makes to the early
> chapters of Genesis have nothing directly to do with Gen. 1
> creation story,
> as you undoubtedly know; they deal with divorce and remarriage (Matt.
> 19:3-9; Mark 10:2-12), and the flood (Matt. 24:37-38; Luke 17:26-28). The
> general argument in this portion of Ham's book (p. 147-148) strikes me as
> being logically faulty.
In each of those cases, who was Jesus' audience? Were they not already
familiar with the old testament and the creation accounts? So was he not
using these as an illustrations and not as a scientific explanation? That is
how I understand those references.
Stephen J. Krogh, P.G.
The PanTerra Group
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 02 2002 - 23:33:39 EDT