5.0 out of 5 stars
A FOLLOW-UP TO THE AUTHOR'S EARLIER "AFTER ITS KIND", October 13, 2011
This review is from: Deluge Story in Stone (Paperback)
This book by Byron Nelson was originally published in 1927, and it and its companion volume
Afters Its Kind were very influential upon later creationists such as Henry Morris and John Whitcomb.
Nelson wrote in the Preface to this 1931 book, "(the author) was compelled in ('After Its Kind'), by lack of space, to discuss one phase of the subject more briefly than he desired... The author would have liked to present more complete evidences of the Flood as the cause of the fossiliferous strata than he was able to do in the space available. He resolved, however, to satisfy his desire ... by writing a separate book dealing only with that subject. That book, a companion to 'After Its Kind,' the writer is presenting to the Church in 'The Deluge Story in Stone.'"
Here are some additional quotations from the book:
"It would be folly indeed to maintain a Flood theory of geology, if the Bible did not countenance such a theory." (Pg. 1)
"The manner of their entombment tells an instructive story... It can hardly be thought that these fish are in their native habitat, or died naturally where they bred and flourished, as uniformitarian geologists maintain regarding shells that are found in the strata. Only some catastrophe of the nature of the Flood can satisfactorily explain their mode of burial." (Pg. 42)
"...for no other reason than that the strata are in the wrong order, on the basis of a supposed organic evolution, the strata are said to have reversed themselves." (Pg. 146)
"According to the sacred record, the purpose of the Flood was to punish and destroy men. The question is asked, Where are the fossils of these men? Why are they not discovered as are the relics of prediluvian plants and animals? To this objection various answers have been given: ... It was God's deliberate purpose to leave no vestige of prediluvian man remaining." (Pg. 161)
"Assuming the Biblical record to be correct, the general similarity between the widely scattered accounts (of the Flood) is readily accounted for. The only alternative to the theory that there was one single flood catastrophe, universal as far as the human race is concerned, which is the basis for all of the Deluge legends, is that there were many separate local floods each of which is the basis of a different flood account. This alternative has this chief objection: namely, that the remarkable similarity in the Deluge legends is not accounted for." (Pg. 166-167)
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No