Re: Cobb County--George Murphy and heresy, related matters

----- Original Message -----
From: <drsyme@cablespeed.com>
To: "Ted Davis" <TDavis@messiah.edu>; <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>;
<gmurphy@raex.com>; <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: Cobb County--George Murphy and heresy, related matters

> Ted.
>
>
> I think there is a fourth "T"!
>
> AuthoriTy!
>
> lol
>
> I think another thing that is driving YEC against TE especially, is a
> mistaken view that if you use evidence from science to interpret
> scripture, than you are putting scripture secondary to science.

This is undoubtedly true. We can respond to this concern by pointing out
that there doesn't seem to be a problem with using other extra-biblical
knowledge to interpet scripture. Nobody has a problem with using
geographical science to figure out where various features mentioned in the
Bible were located. (The biblical writers didn't gives us any maps.)
Knowledge of languages cognate to Hebrew helps us to understand the meaning
of rare Hebrew words in the OT. I Samuel 13:21 is an excellent example of
the way in which archaeology has enabled us to read the text properly.
Compare KJV with NRSV: The KJV translators guessed that the Hebrew /pim/
meant "file" to make sense of the passage. Archaeologists have found
weights marked /pim/ so that we now know that it was a measure of weight of
(apparently) 1/3 shekel. (Even though this doesn't seem like a terribly
important part of the Bible, it is significant in helping to understand why
the Philistines had an advantage over the Israelites in this period of
transition from bronze to iron technology.)

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
Received on Fri Jan 21 12:31:37 2005