Re: How to encourage a former creationist to persevere in faith?

From: Robert Schneider <>
Date: Wed Aug 31 2005 - 20:09:44 EDT

MessageNow, Glenn, please. Michael and I make no claims of divine communication to support our interpretations. Do you? I make no assrtion of infallibility for my reading of Gen. 1, but I do share a view with many others who are better biblical scholars than I, and I'll stand by my position. If you have reasons to conclude that Gen. 1 is not a theological/liturgical narrative, I would be glad to entertain them. I'm sure we stand together in the Lord's love and care.

I look forward to Michael's riposte.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Glenn Morton
  To: 'Robert Schneider' ; 'Michael Roberts' ; 'Bill Hamilton' ; 'Iain Strachan' ; 'Peter Ruest'
  Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 5:44 PM
  Subject: RE: How to encourage a former creationist to persevere in faith?

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Robert Schneider []
    Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 3:07 AM

    If someone asked me what I thought Gen. 1 is, I'd answer much along Michael's lines: it is theology couched in the form of liturgy. There may be something to the scholarly hypothesis that at one time it was a hymn chanted on the Judahite New Year's Day.
    [Glenn Morton]
    I just wish God would talk to me in the same fashion he apparently speaks to you and Michael. But then, I am occasionally crude so maybe God doesn't like my company.

    George [piling on :-) ] said,
>I might as well pile on. The type of view espoused by Iain, Glenn & Peter seems to de-emphasize the genuinely creative
>power of the Word of God, an important biblical theme that reaches its climax in the Johannine prologue. When God speaks,
>things happen - e.g., Jer.23:29. There's a big difference between that picture & one of God setting out a schedule of events
>that are later to be accomplished in some other way. This is not at all to deny that in Gen.1 living things are created
>mediately - a point I have long emphasized - but that happens because of God's Word.

    [GLENN]God's word does not require an IMMEDIATE fulfilment. IF it did, then the prophecy of the messiah given to Adam and Eve would have been fulfilled prior to the invention of writing and we wouldn't have our Bible. But on the other hand, if God's word requires immediate fulfullment then that alone is proof that the Bible isn't God's word because the messianic prophecies wasn't fulfilled immediately.
Received on Wed Aug 31 20:11:57 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 31 2005 - 20:12:05 EDT