RE: Days of Proclamation

Hi Don, you wrote:

>-----Original Message-----
>From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
Behalf Of Don Winterstein
>Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 6:44 PM
>
> DW: I have no doubt that the author intended that "day" here should mean a
particular, isolated increment of time (not
>necessarily 24h). This conviction does not come from imposing modern
literary criticism on an ancient text. Such meaning,
>I think, would come through clearly to ingenuous readers in any language of
any time. The text is as unsubtle and
>straightforward as can be. Why the author felt the creating should have
been broken up into precisely those increments is
>obscure.

I am convinced that the only way to entice YECs out of their position
without driving them to atheism is to offer them an interpretation of the
bible which maintains historicity and which allows the acceptance of
science. The Days of Proclamation theory was what kept me in the faith when
I left YEC. If I had had your view, I would now be an atheist. Of that I
have absolutely no doubt. Indeed, one person who is prominent in the ASA
spent some time during one of crises nursing me back to faith.

I tell you that to note that I really don't care whether or not you find the
days or proclamation useful. It was posted because of Jack Syme's request.
It wasn't meant for you at all. Unfortunately, it seems that jack has
disappeared, so I got no feed back from him.

And as I have said many times on this board, if there is no historicity in
the early part of scripture, ( George, Burgy and I have argued this
territory many a time although George's form of historicity is not one I can
accept), I see absolutely no reason to believe in a God who has no idea how
the earth was created or who has no ability to tell his followers how it was
created. If he has no ability to tell about the creation (which is
verifiable), I see no reason to trust his revelations on theology which are
not verifiable. To me, such a god is not a god; he is a delusion.
Received on Thu Feb 12 23:05:46 2004