For a moment there, I thought I was going to be completely ignored. Thanks
very much for your comments.
You wrote:
>Apologies for butting in here, but I'm glad you brought this up. It is
>something I was thinking of mentioning, but didn't get round to. (And
>I was a bit hesitant as I don't have any first-hand knowledge of Hebrew).
Like you, I have no formal training in the Hebrew language, but I can read.
Apparently, those who do have the formal training, as well as those within
the churches who are in a position to guide, teach, or establish doctrine,
choose to remain silent on this topic.
I have to wonder why, or maybe I don't really want to know the answer to
that question.
My purpose for that posting was fairly straight and simple. I wanted to see
if I was wrong in my interpretation of Genesis. The best way I know of to
accomplish this is to subject my beliefs to the scrutiny of individuals
capable of correcting me if I made errors in my interpretation and
conclusions.
Admittedly, that's a two edged sword, honesty would require the same from
all participants.
As I see it, mine and everyone elses beliefs are based on certain
understandings, interpretations,doctrines,etc. as a foundation with the
entirety of what we believe built or based upon that foundation. If that is
correct, then it would seem at least somewhat important that we try to be
correct in our foundational beliefs. I think Genesis is just such a
foundation for all of creationism. That would make Genesis a good place to
examine carefully, perhaps even before we examine the minute details within
the sciences.
Gary said:
>
>I have heard it said that bara, whilst not necessarily meaning creation
>"ex nihilo" does carry the meaning of bringing into existence something
>new, which didn't exist before. This is used, as you say, in three
>places - the creation of matter, of (animal) life, and of man - suggesting
>that at each of those points God brought into existence some new quality.
>It may be stretching things a bit far, I don't know; but I like to look
>upon this as creation of matter, of consciousness (self-awareness) and
>spirituality (capability of relationship with God).
>
>The other verb means a manipulation of something that was already there.
>This verb is also used of animal life and man; to me this suggests that
>at each of those creative points, God manipulated what was already there
>and also "injected" something new.
>
>Thus, to me, the concept of biological evolution and the biblical framework
>are completely compatible.
>
>I think this is something to which YECs need to give due consideration.
You'll get very little argument from me with that.
It seems to be so obvious, straight forward and simple, that how could it be
missed by so many for so long, which includes myself??
Once again Gary, thanks for your reply.
Mike