Re: [asa] Question on inerrancy

Whether or not Genesis 1 is "not a bad fit all things considered" to BB cosmology is debatable but let that pass for now. I want to point out here that if what Genesis gives us is "what the writer thought God did" then the question has to be asked, in what sense was the account inspired by God? If it isn't simply one more human document from the ancient near east, on the same level as enuma elish or Gilgamesh, (which I'm quite sure isn't what Dick means) then to say that it's "what the writer thought" and in some sense the word of God gets close to what I & others have argued, that God "accomodated" to the human condition in inspiring the text.

I would, though, not ascribe everything in Gen.1 (or other biblical texts) to simply the common views of the writers or their cultures. That's the case with the physical picture presented in the text (dome of the sky &c) but not necessarily with the view that's presented of God's relationship with the world. I.e., there is accomodation to human ideas about the natural & social sciences but not (as least not completely) theology.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Dick Fischer
  To: ASA
  Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 10:20 PM
  Subject: RE: [asa] Question on inerrancy

  Hi Don:

  What God actually did is better described by Big Bang cosmology. What the writer thought God did is described in Genesis and it is not a bad fit all things considered.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri May 16 06:43:15 2008