Re: [asa] Two questions...

The response to this statement needs to go a lot further. For example, at
one time the YECs held that there was an ice or water sphere around the
earth, their version of the firmament. Glenn showed that it would have
the atmospheric temperature above boiling. This firmament was supposed
to have provided water for the flood, but various references indicated
that it was still present during David's lifetime. However, YEC views did
not place the sun and moon upon this firmament, where scripture says they
were. They also ignore the fact that the moon is a light as much as the
sun is, so it cannot merely reflect sunlight. The change in meaning is so
familiar that Hayworth does not recognize it as a change.

A careful reading of the Hebrew text will present many more revisions by
YEC.
Dave (ASA)

On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:20:16 -0600 Merv Bitikofer <mrb22667@kansas.net>
writes:
> Douglas Hayworth wrote:
> > In fact, I would say that straightforward-YEC is
> > theologically a more defensible position than concordism because
> it
> > does not add modern human ideas to the original meaning of
> scripture.
> >
> > Doug
> >
> I think this could be fleshed out quite a bit more. Does YEC really
> not
> add anything new to Scripture? What about the proposition that
> evidence
> seen in nature (indirect, but persistent observation, if you will)
> should be discarded if it conflicts with a certain understanding of
>
> Scripture? I think the case could be made that the Biblical writers
>
> from thousands of years ago, and church fathers from hundreds of
> years
> ago all had a much more integrated view of truth both as revealed
> through prophets and as seen in the created order. I'm not so sure
> they
> would have accepted as sacred truth something that was already in
> their
> time observed to be false. It may have been as recent as Thomas
> Huxley
> before we saw the advent of widespread mutual distrust between the
> keepers of truth in theology and the pursuants of truth in nature.
> This
> widely promoted divorce is, perhaps, the recent aberration that does
>
> violence to our understanding of God and His world. Other
> concordists
> may, of course, be guilty of just the same, but I fail to see how
> YECs
> could be exempted from that. Whatever TEs may be guilty of, they at
>
> least still adhere to the seamless garment (*All* truth is God's
> truth)
> in a way that seems increasingly out of reach for YECs even though
> they
> may still claim the phrase on the surface.
>
> --Merv
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
____________________________________________________________
Need cash? Click to get a cash advance.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw1hEQU3QWn2fJ3ZV5AzLkXCMd5mYKd8tBkyhJiuEfnAT7hzP/

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Feb 9 21:45:48 2009