From: Dick Fischer (dickfischer@earthlink.net)
Date: Sun Nov 16 2003 - 20:34:10 EST
Hi Michael, you wrote:
>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.
Genesis 2-11 is not Genesis One for starters. It is long held by most
Bible scholars that there is a division of authorship somewhere around
Genesis 2-4.
>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 was the Redeemer, Himself who registered a measure of anger with the
Pharisees, calling them "hypocrites." With that in mind, those of us who
reject YEC believe that the earth is old due to a wealth of corroborative
evidence and deride YECs who disregard it.
Yet when some of us (not saying who) are confronted with supporting
historical evidence for the Genesis 2-11 narrative it is likewise
disregarded. How can you criticize YECs (Paul and Michael), and then do
the same thing? Is it that we only respect scientific evidence and reject
historical evidence?
May I remind you that the clay "water-laid" deposits found in the central
cities of southern Mesopotamia at Kish, Shuruppak, Uruk (the biblical
Erech), and Lagash were all dated to the same period: 2900 BC. That is
archaeological evidence. How do you avoid it?
To take the position that there wasn't a flood, is just as disrespectful to
the totality of evidence, only some of it biblical, as it would be to deny
the age of the earth. How are you not being hypocritical?
Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
www.genesisproclaimed.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 16 2003 - 20:38:51 EST