From: Vernon Jenkins (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Jun 14 2003 - 16:31:37 EDT
You make the point "Genesis 1 is in no way a schedule or engineer's log of creation events."
Pray tell us what you believe it to be.
----- Original Message -----
From: D. F. Siemens, Jr.
Cc: email@example.com ; firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 3:52 AM
Subject: Re: The forgotten verses
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" <email@example.com> writes:
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 evolutionary account?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jun 14 2003 - 16:32:19 EDT