RE: [asa] Proposed Revision of Genesis 1-11 in the KJV

From: Dick Fischer <dickfischer@verizon.net>
Date: Tue Apr 22 2008 - 00:34:54 EDT

Well, the rearranging of the order of the chapters in Genesis is
another, but whether its classic or not . The dispersion of the sons of
Noah is in chapter 10 while the incident at Babel is in the following
chapter. This, by the way, is the correct sequence of events.
Cuneiform inscriptions that have been recovered written in Assyrian,
Canaanite, Amorite, etc., all are in a Semitic tongue with some
dialectic differences as you would expect, thus no basic changes have
been detected in the languages of Noah's immediate kin. But the chapter
order has to be reversed to allow all the world's languages to emanate
from Babel which is the standard conservative interpretation. So even
though the dispersion in Gen. 10 precedes the incident at Babel in Gen.
11, nevertheless the interpretation of events following the flood is
just the opposite simply due to an inability to properly interpret.
 
Dick Fischer, author, lecturer
Historical Genesis from Adam to Abraham
 <http://www.historicalgenesis.com> www.historicalgenesis.com
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Merv
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 10:51 PM
To: Dick Fischer; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Proposed Revision of Genesis 1-11 in the KJV
 
Once again, thank you. The Nephilim example is a good one --which I had
never heard of until you sent me your DVD a year or so ago.

I didn't mean to impose a limit of one on your examples --just didn't
want to feel more pestered than you already were, so I asked for "the
classic".

--Merv

Dick Fischer wrote:
Hi Merv,
 
I have to pick just one?
 
A global flood is absolutely necessary for the YEC scenario in order to
sequence the fossil record. Otherwise, the fossil record is a record
laid down in time and they don't allow time. So a local or regional
flood which would have been judgment on Adam's descendants, Noah's
relatives, is of no value to them.
 
If you look at Genesis 6:4, it begins: "There were giants in the earth
in those days ." The Genesis 6:4 "giants" (Nephilim in Hebrew and the
NIV) were some manner of men with ancient origins who apparently were in
residence prior to Noah, and maybe even Adam. Furthermore, they appear
in later chapters. In Numbers 13:33, the post-flood "sons of Anak who
come of the giants" reflects back to Genesis 6:4, to the pre-flood
period.
 
This is from The Expositor's Bible Commentary:
 
On the face of it, the remark presents a problem to the view that only
Noah and his sons survived the Flood, since it suggests that the "sons
of Anak" were descendants of the "Nephilim" (min hannepilim, lit. "from
the Nephilim") who lived before the Flood.
 
How could Nephilim be on both sides of the flood? Because they were
living in what became Canaanite country, the region of Palestine,
outside the flood zone.
 
The Sumerians too had a list of pre-flood kings and a post-flood
civilization. Although they were decimated by the flood, they lived in
an area located further east and some of them escaped to the foothills
of the Zagros mountains. After the flood the Sumerians rebuilt cities
previously occupied by Adam's generations. It took awhile for Noah's
group to reconstitute and some of them took up residence in Babylon.
You know that story. Pottery remains also confirm this sequence of
events.
 
Dick Fischer, author, lecturer
Historical Genesis from Adam to Abraham
www.historicalgenesis.com <http://www.historicalgenesis.com/>
 
 
 

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Apr 22 00:37:11 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 22 2008 - 00:37:12 EDT