Jim writes: What truth is communicated by "God separated the waters?"
While the question is certainly not directed at me, I would first ask anyone
who knows, what word was used in Aramaic to describe gaseous forms?
As with many languages, the root for water I would presume to be similar if
not the same as gas.
Although I speak 3 foreign languages, Aramaic is not one of them.
Insight please.
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
Behalf Of Jim Eisele
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 2:11 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Cc: SteamDoc@aol.com
Subject: Re: ASA Perspective
Allan Harvey writes
>Inspired communication of vital truths about God and his relation to his
creation, set in a form >appropriate to the pre-scientific understanding of
the day."
I 100% agree with this Allan. If it were mathematically possible to agree
more,
I would.
>The problem comes in the view (which would have been totally alien to
Moses) that truth communicated by story is somehow inferior to truth
conveyed in scientific terms. Those with
>that view should remember how often Jesus taught in this "inferior" mode<
Sorry, Allan, but this doesn't work. Two reasons off the top of my head.
Gen 1 could have just said "God created everything" and begun Gen 2.
You're saying that
God created a tremendous amount of confusion and distress unnecessarily.
What truth is communicated by "God separated the waters?"
Jim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 13 2002 - 20:37:30 EST