Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Walter Mattfeld" <mattfeld AT mail.pjsnet.com>]

Dear Dave,

I was disappointed that you chose not to take advantage of this opportunity
to present your understandings about the Flood before this scholarly forum.
I am sure that all would have profited from views from a different
perspective.

From the little you did respond to, I would make the following observations.

Dave:
"I would simply point out that 10 generations before the flood and 10
generations after
seems a mite...convenient?  Hence there's every possibility that the lists
are symbolic or representative."

As you well know, some inerrantists are also "literalists", if Holy Writ
says there was 10 generations before the Flood and after, and gives very
specific years to the lives of these individuals, then that is how it is.
Halley's Bible Handbook (1965), used by many Conservative Protestants (of
coures, not all), gives the following "approximate" dates:

"Though variously placed between 2300BC and 1700 BC, Abraham's date is
generally recognized as about 2000BC. Thus: Adam's date about 4000BC; or,
according to the Septuagint about 5500BC; or, by the Samaritan Pentateuch,
about 4300 BC. FLOOD'S DATE, ABOUT 2400 BC; or, according to the Septuagint
about 3300 BC; or, by the Samaritan Pentateuch, about 3000BC."
(p.32, "The Received Chronology," Henry H. Halley, Halley's Bible Handbook,
An Abbrebviated Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Zondervan Pub.
House, 1965)

You have on earlier occasions proclaimed to this list that you are an
inerrantist. I appreciate that declaration, for it helps me to understand
"your presuppositions" when you you offer "your" interpretations about the
texts. But as an inerrantist, would you please clarify for me which text is
to be regarded "as inerrant," the Masoretic, The Septuagint (used by Early
Christians), the Samaritan, or the Peshitta (Aramaic Christianity) ? I note
disagreements amongst these texts on various data, like different ages for
the 10 pre and post flood individuals. Which text is inerrant for you and
why ?

In regards to the "hard evidence" of Flood deposits, Dave said:

"I would also point out that traditional geology has to posit at least a
dozen global floods to get
the various strata, so the idea of such a thing is hardly lacking in "hard
evidence."

I'm not sure of what Dave is talking about, he doesn't give any particular
time period, cite any sources or scholarly authorities and he gives no
locations for the so-called "Global Floods."

In the Ancient Near East, where the biblical stories are situated, the only
documented Flooding is that of the Nile or the Tigris and Euphrates river
valleys. In Lower Mesopotamia microscopic analysis reveals that in every
case the various flood deposits were freshwater silt from the flooding
Euphrates and Tigris rivers, not a world engulfing saltwater flood as
portrayed in Holy Writ that covered the mountain tops to a depth of 15
cubits (Ge7:20). Archaeologists have concluded that these various Floods
occurred at different times, in different locations within the confines of
Lower Mesopotamia, and in no way totally destroyed mankind and his world,
even locally (that is, that not all the cities of Lower Mesopotamia were
simultaneously destroyed in one great Flood event).

In the earliest known account of the Flood, which scholars believe is
Sumerian, and originating in legends and myths of the 3rd millenium BCE, the
Flood hero Ziusudra (the Bible's Noah), who lives at Shuruppak in Lower
Mesopotamia, is warned of the flood by his god Enki, who speaks to the reed
wall of his house. He tears down his reed house, makes a reed boat and saves
himself and animals. Later Babylonian myths, re-working the Sumerian myth,
have the boat not made of marsh reeds, but of timber, and in the shape of a
huge cube (ark meaning "a box" in Hebrew), interested viewers may, with
profit, read Heidel's accounts on of some of this (Alexander Heidel, The
Babylonian Gensis, The Story of Creation. Univ. of Chicago Press. [1942],
1993, ISBN 0-226-32399-4 pbk).

All the best,

Walter

Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld
Walldorf by Heidelberg
Baden-Wurttemburg
Germany

----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
To: Walter Mattfeld <mattfeld AT mail.pjsnet.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2000 12:49 AM
Subject: Re: The Flood


> Since the message below is nothing but a series of straw-man
> questions that Walter already knows can't be answered, it seems
> pointless to try and join this discussion.    If Walter would care to
rephrase his questions in a
> manner that requests real discussion, rather than phrasing them in
> a way that borders on ridicule, I might be interested in a discussion.