RE: [asa] Land Animals and the Flood

From: Dick Fischer <dickfischer@verizon.net>
Date: Fri Aug 24 2007 - 11:14:27 EDT

A local flood in Mesopotamia 5,000 years ago was not universal judgment
on all mankind as the entire globe was sparsely populated at that time.
So neither was it universal judgment on the world's animal population
nor were they collateral damage.

 

If we understand 'adam in Gen. 6:7 as Adam or descendants of Adam rather
than mankind in general it all makes better sense. The flood terminated
the sinful Adamites except for Noah and his immediate family. The local
Sumerians were decimated but being located further east some fled to the
mountains and survived. The Nephilim (Gen. 6:4) survived as they were
the ancestors of the sons of Anak (Num. 13:33).

 

So the hapless animals in the Tigris-Euphrates basin suffered the same
fate as the sinful Adamite population.

 

Dick Fischer

Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association

Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History

www.genesisproclaimed.org

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Jon Tandy
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 8:56 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] Land Animals and the Flood

 

Gordon,

 

Which verse says that God is sorry he made the animals? Are you
referring

to Gen 6:7 ? I would say before trying to figure out why the Lord was
sorry

about the animals, we need to make sure that's what it actually means.

 

[Gen 6:7] And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from
the

face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the

fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

 

You are assuming "them" at the end of the verse is referring to the

immediate antecedant, "man, beast, creaping thing, fowls." However, in

context this is written after Gen 6:1-7a has said:

 

"...when men began to multiply...the Lord said, My spirit shall not
always

strive with man...And God saw that the wickedness of man was
great...every

imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And
it

repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth...I will destroy man

whom I have created..."

 

There seems to be a theme here. Man is the one with whom God was

displeased, not the animals. The only confusion seems to be that after
God

says he will destroy man, he parenthetically says he will also destroy
the

animals, but the "them" at the end is really referring back to "mankind"

with whom God was displeased. So I would argue that the traditional way
of

reading this (or if you will, glossing over this potential problem) is

correct. The animals just happened to be collateral damage of God's
chosen

method of judgment, which might still be seen as a theological problem.
But

then it becomes part of the larger question of why there is so much

(sinless) animal death throughout time.

 

Jon Tandy

 

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On

Behalf Of gordon brown

Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 9:59 PM

To: asa@calvin.edu

Subject: [asa] Land Animals and the Flood

 

 

In Genesis 6, after describing the extreme sinfulness of man, it is said

that God was sorry that He had made man. It also says that He was sorry

that he had made the land animals. I have somehow managed to mentally
skip

over the latter and assume that what happened was collateral damage.
This

is not good theology since it seems to assume that God couldn't think of
a

means of judgment that would be restricted to humans.

 

It is natural to ask why God was sorry that He had made these animals. I

haven't found very much commentary about this. Ambrose suggested that

God would no longer have a purpose for these creatures if there were no

humans. I am not satisfied with this because it doesn't tell us why He

wasn't sorry that he had made the rest of creation, marine animals for

example.

 

The thought occurred to me that it might have been because men were

worshipping images of these animals. Paul's list in Romans 1:23 of
animals

whose images men worshipped appears to be the same as the list in
Genesis

6. On the other hand Exodus 20:4 also forbade images of anything in the

waters under the earth, whatever that means.

 

I have two questions that someone on the list might have ideas about or

more information on.

1. Is my suggestion about the idolatry a possible answer to why God

said He was sorry about having created land animals?

2. Do the animals that Paul mentions in Romans 1:23 pretty well cover
the

list of creatures whose images were widely worshipped among the pagans?

 

Gordon Brown

 

 

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe

asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

 

 

 

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with

"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Aug 24 11:15:26 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Aug 24 2007 - 11:15:26 EDT