| World of Science Takes Another Step Toward Biblical Truth by Warren Krug (May-August, 1999) |
We know that it often seems excruciatingly painful for mainstream scientists to admit that the Bible could be
right about any controversial scientific issue.
Take the issue of evolution of one species into another. A literal reading of Genesis leaves no room for such a
notion.
Some years ago a group of scientists admitted that the hard evidence for an evolution of species was lacking in
the fossil record. But rather than accepting the biblical view that species or “kinds” were created to remain what
they always have been, this minority group came up with an idea called “punctuated equilibrium”. This means
that in the past, species generally remained stable, but at times there suddenly was a major adaptation that
caused a new species to arise. Of course, this sudden change was too fast to leave any kind of fossil record.
Another example concerns the numerous flood traditions. Scientists have long recognized the similarities of
these traditions (e.g. a large ark or boat; a tiny remnant of the human race saved; the ark coming to rest on a
mountain, etc.) found in every part of the world including the Western hemisphere.
But rather than admitting that these legends might actually be based upon a real historical event, the
mainstream view is that all the traditions including the Bible’s descended from some other ancient legend such
as a Babylonian account of a major deluge.
Our lead article has to do with a the publication of a recent secular book which takes a step toward verifying the
historicity of Noah’s Flood. But, alas, the book’s authors cannot bring themselves around to accepting the Bible’
s version of a worldwide flood.
The article is a review of the book Noah’s Flood: The New Scientific Discoveries about the Event that Changed
History. This review, reprinted from Christian News seems to be that of Simon & Schuster, which published the
book back in January.
The title of the book is promising enough, but one doesn’t have to read very far into the review before learning
that the authors William Ryan and Walter Pitman are not about to accept everything in Genesis.
They concede that this Black Sea flood was a “great flood”, not your run-of-the-mill “local flood” that skeptics for
years have been saying was the basis for the Noah account.
Although this Black Sea flood lasted nearly a year and caused water levels to rise 6 inches a day, it only
covered 60,000 square miles, not the whole world.
The authors also believe the people displaced by the flood in the Black Sea region (“what may have been the
biblical garden of Eden”) took with them memories of this event when they settled elsewhere. Hence, the flood
legends.
The conclusions this book offers are controversial and unsatisfactory. But we can be thankful for the progress
that has been made. Pray that the Holy Spirit will now lead more scientists to complete the journey toward
accepting the Bible totally. LSI
right about any controversial scientific issue.
Take the issue of evolution of one species into another. A literal reading of Genesis leaves no room for such a
notion.
Some years ago a group of scientists admitted that the hard evidence for an evolution of species was lacking in
the fossil record. But rather than accepting the biblical view that species or “kinds” were created to remain what
they always have been, this minority group came up with an idea called “punctuated equilibrium”. This means
that in the past, species generally remained stable, but at times there suddenly was a major adaptation that
caused a new species to arise. Of course, this sudden change was too fast to leave any kind of fossil record.
Another example concerns the numerous flood traditions. Scientists have long recognized the similarities of
these traditions (e.g. a large ark or boat; a tiny remnant of the human race saved; the ark coming to rest on a
mountain, etc.) found in every part of the world including the Western hemisphere.
But rather than admitting that these legends might actually be based upon a real historical event, the
mainstream view is that all the traditions including the Bible’s descended from some other ancient legend such
as a Babylonian account of a major deluge.
Our lead article has to do with a the publication of a recent secular book which takes a step toward verifying the
historicity of Noah’s Flood. But, alas, the book’s authors cannot bring themselves around to accepting the Bible’
s version of a worldwide flood.
The article is a review of the book Noah’s Flood: The New Scientific Discoveries about the Event that Changed
History. This review, reprinted from Christian News seems to be that of Simon & Schuster, which published the
book back in January.
The title of the book is promising enough, but one doesn’t have to read very far into the review before learning
that the authors William Ryan and Walter Pitman are not about to accept everything in Genesis.
They concede that this Black Sea flood was a “great flood”, not your run-of-the-mill “local flood” that skeptics for
years have been saying was the basis for the Noah account.
Although this Black Sea flood lasted nearly a year and caused water levels to rise 6 inches a day, it only
covered 60,000 square miles, not the whole world.
The authors also believe the people displaced by the flood in the Black Sea region (“what may have been the
biblical garden of Eden”) took with them memories of this event when they settled elsewhere. Hence, the flood
legends.
The conclusions this book offers are controversial and unsatisfactory. But we can be thankful for the progress
that has been made. Pray that the Holy Spirit will now lead more scientists to complete the journey toward
accepting the Bible totally. LSI