Re: [asa] Turning back the sun

From: <>
Date: Mon Oct 08 2007 - 00:42:41 EDT

I suppose if we were trying to be hyper-literal (if only to show its shortcomings) then one could answer that the implication below is "from this time on..." (which seems more implied in the second passage below and admittedly more nebulous in the first. Sort of like the flood ... "never again" doesn't mean a past occurrence was a violation of covenant.?

Sorry for the long delay in replying.

But the passage draws upon their _past_ experience in knowing that the Moon & Sun do not deviate from their cycles.? It can't refer to "from this time on..." because then the argument would carry no force:? they have no experience of the future by which to judge the?consistency of future sky cycles.

Also, there is no recorded place in Scripture where God makes a "covenant" with the Sun & Moon, and particularly there is no such covenant occurring?any time after the Joshua event.? The "covenant" that the readers were intended to understand is clearly a literary allusion the event of God making the sun and moon and endowing them with consistency in their cycles.? God (in this Isaiah passage) is promoting the idea of his?"creation" of the sun and moon to "making a covenant" with the sun and moon.? He calls it a covenant in order to compare it with the Jewish covenant.? Based on this heavenly "covenant", the Jews are to understand that when God makes a covenant He will always keep it.? So if the sun and moon literally stopped turning in the sky in Joshua 10, and if the readers of Isaiah were supposed to have recollection of that past event, then God's argument in Isaiah would fall apart.


Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! -

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Oct 8 00:43:29 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Oct 08 2007 - 00:43:29 EDT