Re: Seely's Views

From: <>
Date: Thu Aug 19 2004 - 22:11:13 EDT

In a message dated 8/19/04 4:11:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time, writes:

> I tend to share some of Glenn's misgivings about arguments of
> accommodation, but I also see the "scientific" passages as reflecting views of the day. I
> am more comfortable in labeling these as everyday or phenomenological
> language (cf. Calvin's comments on the astronomical deficiencies of ranking the
> moon ahead of the planets as a prominent light). Also, although the imagery of
> Genesis 1 and other passages certainly suggest a flat earth and a solid dome
> for a sky, if taken as scientific statements, they don't come out and say
> "the earth is flat". A flat earth and a solid dome for a sky both accurately
> describe their appearance to the ordinary observer and would certainly be part
> of the ordinary language of the day; they are still part of everyday language
> in our culture.

What is it about accommodation that you are uneasy with?

It may be a technicality, but Ramm, I think rightly, defined phenomenal
language as having to do strictly with appearances. But, Genesis goes beyond
appearances with God _making_ a firmament, and there actually being a sea above it,
which later serves as a source of the waters for the Flood. The flat earth is
not so important, but the sea below it (Ps 24:2) is since it also serves as a
source of water for the Flood.

Received on Thu Aug 19 22:32:14 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 19 2004 - 22:32:15 EDT