Re: The Curse - Upon All Creation or Just Mankind?

From: <drsyme@cablespeed.com>
Date: Wed Sep 22 2004 - 08:51:05 EDT

I dont really think it is a biological question. Paul's
point is that the thing you put in the ground, is not at
all the thing that is raised up. I think he would also be
ok if you used the word transformed, or changed. Because
he was talkinig about our bodies after death, he was using
the seed as an analogy. The seed has to "die" before it
can become something better.

Certainly parts of the seed after germination stay in the
ground and eventually decay, or get absorbed into the
plant, but those parts of the seed dont exist in the
plant. So biologically Paul is not really wrong. But
again, this wasnt a lesson about agricultural science.

I chose this passage when Stein asked about seeds dying.
Sheila's phrase, when she mentioned the dying seed,
sounded a lot like this passage intentionally or not. ;)

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 12:17:50 +0100
  "Michael Roberts" <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
wrote:
>Ah! But if Paul was wrong on his science then his
>theology may be wrong.
>
>There is the same problem with the flat young earth of
>the Old Testament.
>
>If the bible writers did not accommodate themselves of
>contemporary thought
>but were fully inspired to be inerrant then either all
>science is wrong or
>all Judaeo Christianity is false.
>
>Of course Jesus also got it wrong with tiny stars falling
>to earth.
>
>I will leave readers to work out where this leads us
>
>Michael
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Stein A. Stromme" <stromme@mi.uib.no>
>To: <asa@calvin.edu>
>Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 11:48 AM
>Subject: Re: The Curse - Upon All Creation or Just
>Mankind?
>
>
>[jack syme]
>
>| I think Paul has more authority than you on this. ;)
>|
>| I Cor 15: 35 But someone may ask, "How will the dead be
>raised? What
>| kind of bodies will they have?" 36 What a foolish
>question! When you
>| put a seed into the ground, it doesn't grow into a
>plant unless it
>| dies first.
>
>This may indeed contain an inspired spiritual insight,
>which I am not
>denying at all. But the context of my post (below) was
>"death" in a
>more literal, biological sense. I don't think Paul
>wanted to teach
>the Corinthians biology, but rather that he was using a
>metaphor or
>parable based on what may have been the scientific
>outlook of his day.
>
>SA
>====================================================================
>
>| > [Sheila Wilson]
>| >
>| > | ... Death is often referred to as a good thing;
>for example, a seed
>| > | must be buried in the ground and die before a new
>plant is grown ...
>| >
>| > I'm not a biologist, but the statement that the seed
>"dies" has always
>| > struck me as weird. On the other hand, death of
>cells and various
>| > other life forms seems to be a very basic ingredient
>in life. Perhaps
>| > someone more qualified than me could comment on this.
>| >
>| > SA
>
>--
>Stein Arild StrÝmme +47 55584825, +47 95801887
>Universitetet i Bergen Fax: +47 55589672
>Matematisk institutt www.mi.uib.no/stromme/
>Johs Brunsg 12, N-5008 BERGEN stromme@mi.uib.no
>
>
>
>
Received on Wed Sep 22 09:13:01 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Sep 22 2004 - 09:13:02 EDT