Re: Conflicts and confrontation

On Fri, 2 Jun 2006 07:38:03 -0500 mrb22667@kansas.net writes:
> <snip>
> Quoting Jon Tandy <tandyland@earthlink.net>:
>
> > 1. You wrote, "Science aside, it seems to me their concerns remain
> > well-founded." Probably so. If we do set science completely
> aside, and
> > consider only theological interpretations, what is the most
> natural
> > interpretation? I would have to say that the YEC would be the
> most natural
> > reading of the Bible, considering that most Christians before the
> scientific
> > age believed in a young earth and global flood.
>
> It was the most natural reading before they had any reasons to think
>
> otherwise. As soon as geology concluded (well before Darwin) the
> antiquity of
> the earth, almost all theologians accepted this with nary an
> objection.
> The "Young earth" part didn't become a big part of the movement
> until later in
> the twentieth century.
>
I don't know enough patristics to be satisfied, but I have stumbled
across a few matters that I think apply to the notion that 144 hours of
fiat creation is the natural reading. Several of the church fathers were
clear that the days cannot be 24-hour periods because the temporal
markers did not appear till the 4th day. Augustine understood that
creation had to be instantaneous (fits the Big Bang) with development of
the implicit structures over time. He understood that a deity that had to
fiddle around with creation to finally get it right did not reflect
omnipotence and omniscience. I note that the more recent concordist
interpretations involve some strange manipulations of grammar and logic.

Indications that the earth is old are noted to go back to Roger Bacon
(~1220-1292) and Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1514), and clearly to Niels
Stensen (Nicholaus Steno, 1638-1686, published 1669). By the very early
19th century, there was the interpretation by Italian priests that the
days indicated the completion of an age. Others suggested that the 6 days
were the beginnings of ages. Michael has noted that an ancient earth was
generally believed by Christians before Darwin's publication. Of course,
if you are only considering those who have an image of God as an old man
with a great white beard somewhere "up there" creating things, you've hit
the "natural reading."
Dave
Received on Fri Jun 2 15:00:42 2006