Critical Review by:

Erich Rauch, Director of Communications, American Vision

    "…Not content to show how we are supposedly inconsistent within the dispensational hermeneutic, Ice attempts to show how we are at odds with a consistently preterist hermeneutic as well. He quotes full-preterist Timothy Martin who argues in favor of a local flood understanding in Genesis 9, based on the preterist hermeneutic of a local judgment of Israel in AD 70. Ice and Martin are on opposite ends of the spectrum. Both have radically different views of the beginning and end, because one (Ice) interprets the entire Bible through his view of the beginning, while the other (Martin) interprets the entire Bible through his view of the end. This is the fallacy of the excluded middle. Ice would have us believe that these two views are the only logically consistent ones. But nowhere does the Bible itself give us this one-way hermeneutical model, in either direction. Not to mention the fact that the Bible is very scant in its details of the antediluvian world. In fact, 2 Peter 3:6-7 contrasts the “world that then was,” with the “heavens and earth, which are now.” It is not a simple “apples to apples” comparison…."

A Flood of Consistency 

 

back to Critical Review  


Also published in Biblical Worldview Magazine, Volume 22, Number 8, August, 2006, pp. 14-15 

Beyond Creation Science
P.O. Box 99
Whitehall, MT 59759 406-287-2146
Email Us