Re: YEC< OEC, PC, TE, etc.

Paul Arveson (arveson@oasys.dt.navy.mil)
Mon, 18 Mar 96 18:08:59 EST

In message <v02130500ad72e2990a5f@[137.229.31.24]> John Miller writes:
> Larry wrote (in part):
>
> >To stop being negative and only pointing
> >out what Genesis 1 can't mean, I'll put forward my conclusion that Genesis
> >1 is an intentional apologetic for "Sabbath" written in such a way as to be
> >so clear to any original Hebrew reader that thinking it had to do with
> >correcting or even addressing 20th century cosmological or biological
> >theories would be laughable.
>
> Care to enlarge on your view of Genesis 1 as an apologetic for Sabbath?
> I'd like to hear more.
>
> John
>

One approach to Genesis 1 that I have not so far seen describe here is the
"framework theory" developed in Europe, by Noodtjie (sp?) and described by Henri
Blocher in his IVP book, "In the Beginning". He places a lot of emphasis on the
symmetrical structure of the 6 days, which represent "tablets" in a framework or
pattern of 3 X 2. He alludes to Augustine's non-temporal approach to Genesis 1,
but carries it further and relates it to other narratives. He calls it a
"literary" interpretation. The Sabbath comes in naturally as a day following
the revelation of these tablets. I can't describe it any further off the top of
my head.

This view has a lot going for it, but I have hardly seen any discussion of it
in America. I think one reason is that so far it is vague; it needs to be
sharpened and made into a clear and distinct idea for our modern minds. I don't
think Blocher succeeded in that respect, and certainly Augustine didn't. Has
anybody found a clear and brief description of this view?

Paul Arveson, Research Physicist
73367.1236@compuserve.com arveson@oasys.dt.navy.mil
(301) 227-3831 (W) (301) 227-1914 (FAX) (301) 816-9459 (H)
Code 724, NSWC, Bethesda, MD 20084