RE: the box

Ok, lets not rehash interpretation but I would say that there are basically
two boxes I see. YEC or figurative/allegorical/poetic. Those two
categories constitute about 99.9% of the interpretations I see when it comes
to Genesis 1-4

But, there may be merit in your criticism that some of us, me in particular,
might not be able to think out of the box of concordism. But then physics
has that problem as well. I don't know a single physical theory which isn't
concordistic in nature. Indeed, all science is concordistic. Only with
religion do we leave the realm of concordims.

You can have the last word, George, I really don't want to rehash things.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: George Murphy [mailto:gmurphy@raex.com]
> Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2004 6:41 AM
> To: Glenn Morton
> Cc: jack syme; ASA; Dick Fischer
> Subject: the box
>
>
> Glenn Morton wrote:
> .............................
>
> > GRM: I view Genesis 1 as the pre-planning for the universe.
> The 'and it
> > was so" after so many of the verses is not what God said but what the
> > Biblical narrator said. By viewing Genesis 1 in this fashion,
> Genesis 2,
> > the supposed second account of creation is really several billion years
> > later at the time when mankind was created. Thus,
> the'evidence' supporting
> > YEC, could be merely the wrong conclusion coupled with the fact that
> > Theologians seem to never think out of hte box.
>
> We've debated the interpretation of early Gen. before &
> there's probably no
> point in rehasing that. But I must take exception to your last
> sentence as a general
> statement about theologians. It depends a lot on what "box"
> you're talking about. I
> suppose you can draw one that encompasses the views of
> significant theologians & then
> say they never think outside it but that's pretty artificial. &
> in reply one might say
> something about those who are unable to think outside the box of
> concordism.
>
> Shalom,
> George
>
>
> George L. Murphy
> gmurphy@raex.com
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
>
>
Received on Sat Feb 7 10:47:59 2004