Walter Hicks wrote:
> Sorry, GeorgeWhat I mean, George, is that Genesis Chapter 1 presents a
> different time sequence of creation that genesis 2. It is difficult to
> reconcile if you think that God can do only one thing and fit it into
> this one universe. If, however, these are different accounts because
> God did two different things (like human beings can) then they tell a
> different story. My opinion is that God first allowed man to work out
> a simple relationship as described in genesis 2 and 3. When we failed
> to follow the rules, we were put into this universe of increasing
> entropy and finite lifetimes. (Two different stories in two different
> space-time continua). the reason I believe this is because I find it
> difficult to fit Genesis 1, 2 and 3 into one universe but no
> difficulty in assuming that God can do more than one thing.
1) As I noted earlier, the "rivers section" of Gen.2 indicates that
that account refers to our present world (in which at least 2 of those
rivers are identifiable). This doesn't require that it be historical
narrative but whatever it is it's about our earth.
2) Was that first universe not one of increasing entropy? If Adam or
Eve put a bucket of hot water next to one of cold water did they not
come to a common temperature? For that matter, the chemical reactions
their lives required couldn't have operated without the 2d law.
3) You assume that the 2 creation accounts must be reconcilable as
historical accounts but there is no need to make this assumption.
Questions about what God could do are irrelevant. The Bible deals with
the one world God has created, not Dreamtimes, parallel worlds, &c.
George L. Murphy
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Dec 18 2001 - 22:15:50 EST