2) The points I make do not commit to any particular stance on the historicity of Noah’s ark. I do note in passing that there is no geological evidence for a recent global flood, but it is possible to agree with my thesis/discussion while disagreeing about the geological evidence. Obviously, that scientific question is more involved than 800 words can offer. Hence, this blog (among others) is filled with long, detailed discussions on the geological evidence to support my claim.
3) In saying that “the historical question is not primarily A, but B”, I am not proposing a simple dichotomy between A and B (hence my use of the term ‘primarily’). I understand that the question of the historicity of Gen. 6–9 is still valid and cannot necessarily be divorced from, say, the theological application of this story to redemptive history. My main point is that we should at least agree on how/whether the story speaks to our vocation today before marginalizing ourselves (perhaps unnecessarily) from most of modern society.
Enjoy! Hopefully I will be able to continue my thoughts here in the next week or so.