RE: [asa] A few literal problems in Genesis

From: Alexanian, Moorad <alexanian@uncw.edu>
Date: Tue Mar 11 2008 - 09:45:16 EDT

Let us not forget life. How do we make the "breathe of God" part of the
subject matter of science?

 

Moorad

 

"Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into
his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." Gen.
2:7.

 

 

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Jon Tandy
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 8:50 AM
To: 'ASA list'
Subject: [asa] A few literal problems in Genesis

 

In the last few days I've pondered a few points about Genesis 1 and 2
that I don't recall reading about in other discussions (although I'm
sure they must have been somewhere).

 

First, I was pondering the statement that the animals and Adam were
created "out of the dust of the ground". I realize that some have
inferred that this statement could include evolution, as the earth
itself is what produces the variety of creatures. I think this is a
tenuous conclusion when taken as a "concordist" interpretation, but it
does make for an interesting rhetorical argument. However, if this is
taken as a potentially straightforward description of evolution
producing man from the ground (from common, existing structures), then
for consistency what would the creation of Eve be taken to mean
scientifically, as being from Adam's rib? In other words, for those who
take the one statement as a scientific inference of Adam's evolution,
how can they apply consistent interpretation when it comes to Eve's
creation as a scientific event?

 

Second, the sun and moon were made to "divide the day from the night",
with the sun to rule over the day, and the moon to rule over the night.
If this was so (according to a "literal" interpretation), then why do we
see the moon come out in the daytime and disappear at night sometimes?
It seems that if this verse were to be taken literally, the moon has
ceased functioning according to its created purpose, which was to rule
over the night.

 

Also, since God divided the light from the darkness in Gen 1:4, why did
it need to be divided again in verse 14 by the sun and moon? How do the
sun and moon divide the light from darkness, since both of them cast
light on the earth (the moon for at least most of the month)? The only
thing I can think is that dividing the light from darkness in verse 14
means to divide the day from night (sun=day, moon=night), which goes
back to my previous paragraph about why are the moon and the sun
sometimes out during the day -- that is, if all this is to be taken in a
strictly "literal" 20th century cosmology. For me, this all contributes
toward showing why a framework or some other interpretation is more
plausible.

 

 

Jon Tandy

 

 

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Mar 11 09:46:13 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 11 2008 - 09:46:13 EDT