Re: In defense of Paul Seely

 If you look at the "aims" link at the rtforum website, it's pretty clear that philosophically they would have to dismiss any attempt to diminish concordism. On the other hand, professional historians (e.g., Lindberg and Numbers) do tend to dismiss Jaki's attempts at doing history. But since I haven't read the book I've probably said too much already.
 
Karl
****************
Karl V. Evans
cmekve@aol.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Haas <haas.john@comcast.net>
To: Robert Schneider <rjschn39@bellsouth.net>; ASA list <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 16:50:38 -0400
Subject: Re: In defense of Paul Seely

To Bob and all:
 
One reviewer of Jaki's Genesis 1 at < http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt51.html> noted:
 
Stanley L. Jaki's /Genesis 1 through the Ages/ (London: Thomas More Press, 1992; distributed in the U.S. by the Wethersfield Institute, 230 Park Avenue, Suite 1528, New York, NY 10169) purports to be a history of the exegesis of the first chapter of Genesis. "While the book, from its title, seems to promise a review of the insights into this chapter that the great commentators have expressed over the ages, its actual theme is that they had no insight. The positive thrust of the book lies almost entirely in the new insight that the author claims for himself. "
 
The book would appears to be in the "debunking-know it all style" characterized by his other works. You either love him or hate him. Read the reviewers take..
 
Jack Haas
 
________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free.
Received on Wed Jun 7 18:08:14 2006