From: Glenn Morton (glennmorton@entouch.net)
Date: Sat Oct 11 2003 - 11:43:53 EDT
-----Original Message-----
From: allenroy [mailto:allenroy@peoplepc.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2003 12:15 AM
To: Glenn Morton
GRM:I had written:
If, as I argue, Genesis 1 represents the
pre-planning for the universe, then Genesis 1 should be interpreted not as
And God said, 'let there be light and it was so'
But as
And God said, 'let there be light'. [a later editor said]: 'And it was
so.'
But the passage doesn't say (and this is very important) 'And it was so
IMMEDIATELY/Instantly'
GRM: Allen had replied:
That is convenient, invent a redactor, for which there is zero evidence,
and you can make the Bible say anything you want. And this comes from the
guy who just said. "Anybody who wishes may write his or her amplified
Genesis. I don't wish to."
GRM: Allen, that is an interesting reaction since the word immediately
doesn't appear in Genesis' creation account. If anyone is adding to what
the Bible says, it is those who hold that it all happened immediately,
lacking that word in the text. I don't argue that that was the historical
way of interpreting that passage, but quite simply the verbage doesn't
support it.
It is not necessary to interpret Genesis 1 to be such that the universe is
created on "day four" of the creation week. Rather, Genesis 1 can be
interpreted to allow for a previously created universe to come into view
from the planet through a series of events during the Creation Week.
GRM: It is necessary if one wants to match observational reality. If one
wishes to belive things which have long ago been falsified, be my guest.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 11 2003 - 11:44:10 EDT