Re: Reasons to reject concordism in Genesis 1

From: Jan de Koning (
Date: Tue May 28 2002 - 17:10:26 EDT

  • Next message: Stuart d Kirkley: "Re: Randomness"

    At 07:41 AM 28/05/02 +0000, Jim Eisele wrote in part:

    >Theologism claims that Gen 1 is not presenting history. I reject this
    >notion in the most firm manner.

    I still don't understand what you mean by "theologism", though I assume
    that i fall in that category, since i don't agree with the other two at
    all. Also, I have repeated several times that one cannot study Gen.1
    separated from Gen.1 -11, separated from the five books of Moses, separated
    from the OT, separate from the rest of the Bible.

    It is okay with me to stop discussing this, though I have not heard the
    answers to my objections, which I will not voice again.

    Jan de K.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 28 2002 - 17:28:50 EDT