Re: [asa] Does ASA believe in Adam and Eve?

1) You apparently don't know the difference between what a biblical text says & theological deductions drawn from it.

2) It should have given you some pause when I had to point out that you'd misquoted the text to bring the word "judgment" into it. You apparently had formed your interpretation of the text before reading it carefully. You ought to practice a little introspective Tendenzkritik.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: David Opderbeck
  To: George Murphy
  Cc: ASA list
  Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 4:26 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Does ASA believe in Adam and Eve?

  You can keep repeating it, but when the whole passage is about the Day of the Lord coming like a thief, and how we are to live in light of that fact, the theme of coming judgment is as obvious as the nose on your face.

  On 3/29/07, George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:
    David -

    I can only repeat - & won't repeat again - that "judgment" is not the primary theme of II Peter 3:1-10, & that to say that the question is not about "the scope of the present judgment" is a red herring: It's not about judgment at all.

    Shalom
    George
    http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: David Opderbeck
      To: George Murphy
      Cc: ASA list
      Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 2:43 PM
      Subject: Re: [asa] Does ASA believe in Adam and Eve?

       
      I am simply pointing out the most basic point that the writer is making - that the promised end is an end for the whole present order of creation. OTOH, by trying to limit the scope of the destruction you are the one who is insisting on geographical details.
       
      You may be misunderstanding me on one point: I am not suggesting any limitation on the scope of the final judgment. (To be even more clear, I'm amillennial, not a preterist). I agree that the final judgment is an end for the whole present order of creation. However, I disagree that the most basic point the writer is making in 2 Peter chapter 3 is about the scope of the final judgment. The most basic point in chapter 3 it is about the suddenness of the final judgment, not its scope. I think the context makes that abundantly clear. The universal scope of the final judgment, I think, isn't a matter of any particular proof-text, but rather is implicit in the broader themes of the apocalyptic literature. And regardless, like many other typologies in scripture, the use of the flood as a type of the final judgment doesn't imply that the scope and nature of the type is precisely the same as the scope and nature of that which it typifies.
       

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Mar 29 19:12:56 2007