Re: YEC and interpretations (was: Re: asa-digest V1 #3214)

From: Jim Armstrong (jarmstro@qwest.net)
Date: Wed Mar 19 2003 - 11:15:41 EST

  • Next message: allenroy: "Re: YEC and interpretations (was: Re: asa-digest V1 #3214)"

    My "Mmm" post was not to ding you, ...just a thought stimulated by your
    post. Your post led me to think that this might be a reasonable question
    to ask to perhaps level the field a little when the "theory" card is
    played in creationist conversation. Regards JimA

    RFaussette@aol.com wrote:

    > In a message dated 3/19/03 1:07:42 AM Eastern Standard Time,
    > jarmstro@qwest.net writes:
    >
    >
    >> Mmm, I suppose one might be led to enquire in such a circumstance,
    >> "What theory do you follow in interpreting scripture?" Maybe I'll
    >> give that a try next time the T word comes up in this context! -
    >> Jim Armstrong
    >>
    >
    >
    > When you interpret the actions of the chosen people themselves in
    > Scripture, you must look through a pastoralist's eyes, but most
    > particularly in the Torah rather than the entire Bible. Pastoralists
    > wrote the Bible and they were animal breeders. Pastoralism is not a
    > theory. It's the purview of 4H clubs. Animal domestication and
    > breeding is not a theory. The earliest pastoralists to write religious
    > books were the Indo-Aryans, cattle breeders. The Levites, priestly
    > caste in Judaism sacrifice cattle, not sheep, just like those earliest
    > known religionists. The greatest symbol in the Bible is the
    > pastoralist, the shepherd.
    >
    > rich



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Mar 19 2003 - 11:15:46 EST