RE: [asa] biological evolution and a literal Adam- logically inconsistent?

From: George Cooper <georgecooper@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Tue Sep 09 2008 - 09:43:03 EDT

Hi Gordon,

Consider verse 8...

And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was
parted, and became into four heads.

It seems to me that only one river was described within the garden and that
as it flowed out from Eden it became four separate rivers. This could
happen if the Garden were in a very high region near the headwaters of the
Tigris and Euphrates today. An altered geology, I think, could account for
two other rivers, one flowing east, IIRC.

This idea is somewhat supported with the verse that stations Cherubims only
on one side of the Garden. Why only one side? Perhaps the other three were
impassable. I envision bluffs in lieu of swamps.

"Coope"

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of gordon brown
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:30 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] biological evolution and a literal Adam- logically
inconsistent?

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, George Cooper wrote:

> Thanks David.
>
> Given the peak glacial period was around 16,000 years ago, perhaps other
> geological changes existed that would give greater credibility to Eden
being
> very near the headwaters.
>
> "Coope"

George,

Genesis appears to want to tell its readers where the Garden of Eden was
located. So it has to be the geography of the time when it was written,
which would also have to be similar to that of the period in which the
events that are described occurred in order to be relevant. The Hebrew
describes the four rivers as "heads", which would seem to fit the
situation in which all of them come together to form a single river. It
was assumed that the readers would know where the Euphrates was. The
others were described by the lands through which or beside which they
flowed. Today there is another river that joins from the east the
confluence of the Tigris and Euphrates, and in a wetter period there was
another river that joined them from the west. These fit the description of
the rivers in Genesis 2.

Gordon Brown (ASA member)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Campbell [mailto:pleuronaia@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 3:47 PM
> To: George Cooper
> Cc: ASA
> Subject: Re: [asa] biological evolution and a literal Adam- logically
> inconsistent?
>
>> If villages existed 20,000 years ago in the region near the four
>> mentioned headwaters, would we likely know about it by now?
>
> Just a note that some models do not take it as headwaters but as a
> spot towards the mouth where the rivers join up. E.g., Glen Morton's
> model or Kitchen's suggestion of a spot in what's now the upper end of
> the Persian Gulf (one of the rivers being identified with a
> paleochannel now buried in the desert of the northern end of Arabia).
>
> I don't know if there is much non-proprietary data on the Quaternary
> record in the Gulf. With the combination of security challenges and
> oil companies wanting to keep data secret (plus the fact that the
> relevant layers are far to shallow to interest the oil companies), I'd
> guess there isn't that much data.
>
>
> --
> Dr. David Campbell
> 425 Scientific Collections
> University of Alabama
> "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
>
>
> 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 Tue Sep 9 09:44:17 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Sep 09 2008 - 09:44:17 EDT