From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Jun 13 2003 - 22:52:03 EDT
George is too careful a student of both scripture and science to adopt a
concordist stance. Despite its popularity among OEC, it is about a messed
up as YEC. Genesis 1 is in no way a schedule or engineer's log of
creation events. Please be more careful of views you ascribe to others.
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 23:31:53 +0100 "Vernon Jenkins"
Let me now, for the sake of argument, accept your suggested parallel
between the parable of the Good Samaritan and the Genesis 1 account of
the Creation, viz that neither need be literally true to achieve its
respective purpose in the divinely-inspired text. But if you believe the
Creation narrative to be an accurate but _figurative_ account of what in
reality is a theistic evolutionary process extending over aeons of time
then, I suggest, there will be certain inevitable expectations, viz (1) a
clear mapping of the written details onto significant events in this
assumed process, and (2) a clear harmonisation of the orders in which
those events occurred.
Accordingly, how do you respond to the point that, according to Genesis
1, birds are created _before_ land animals (Gn.1: 20, 24)? Evolutionary
theory, of course, requires that this order be reversed. Again, what is
the evolutionary parallel to the 'division of the waters' (Gn.1:6,7)?
Another problem arises in connection with the 6 days of creative activity
followed by 1 day of rest. Clearly, these are important features in the
Creation narrative. What would you say are the parallels in the
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 13 2003 - 22:54:24 EDT