From: George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Sun Nov 16 2003 - 16:24:50 EST
Michael Roberts wrote:
.......................
> Dick
>
> I think you miss Paul's point. What he is saying , I think, is that
> early Genesis portrays things according to the cosmology of the day
> i.e. late 2nd millen b.c. Thus in Gen One it is according to the
> Egyptian style cosmology of the day and thus in terms of a flat earth
> (vs 6-8). It portrays rather than describes real events . So we can
> say that the world view of Genesis is true today and the world picture
> i.e. cosmology is not. I have long held this for Genesis One and am
> intrigued how Paul develops it for the Flood.
>
> I have to admit that I am more inclined to Paul's viewpoint than to
> yours or Glenn's but I would see all trying to do the same thing. I
> think we need a big tent of OEC views e.g. Glenn, you, Paul and George
> and respect each other and concentrate of the two problems -
> atheistic evolution and YEC also liberal theological views which may
> retain the creator but emasculate the Redeemer.........................................
It depends to some extent on what one means by "liberal", but one of the main
problems of 20th century theology - I think especially of Bultmann - is just the
reverse. I.e., it emphsizes salvation (often in existential terms) & relegates creation
to a secondary role.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 16 2003 - 16:28:30 EST