---------- From: glenn morton <mortongr@flash.net> To: George Murphy
<gmurphy@raex.com> Subject: Re: The importance of concordism Date: Mon, Jan
10, 2000, 2:45 PM
> At 03:26 PM 1/10/00 -0500, George Murphy wrote: 1st I should note that
> "concordism" is a very broad term which can cover a spectrum of positions, so
> it shouldn't be surprising that any attempt to speak about what it means will
> not be accepted by some who consider themselves concordists. (In fact I -
> moi! - have been accused of concordism because I think that the idea of
> mediated creation in Gen.1 is significant for a theological understanding of
> evolution - which really stretches the term.)
> George, your reputation is ruined! :-)
>> I believe that God really did create the heavens and the earth. But it's
>> problematic to call what happened "in the beginning" "history" since it's the
>> beginning of time, not something that happened in time. & I have even
>> greater difficulty seeing your "Days of proclamation" view as "history" since
>> then Gen.1 happened before time. We've discussed this before.
Is the above paragraph glenn speaking?
Could someone explain the logic of interpretation that asserts time was
created? "In the beginning" implies the beginning position of a sequence of
events in time. It does not appear to assert that the position has to be
zero for time. What was created was space and matter. Does the act of
creation, itself, not imply the necessity of time before creation and a time
after creation? What am I missing in that logic?
> Maybe I didn't fully understand what you were saying last time because this
> sounds a bit new to me. If you limit history only to time, then yes, my views
> are not 'historical'. But I would contend that anything God does is outside
> of time including the crucifixion. Since Christ is described as the lamb slain
> from the foundation of the world, and since he wasn't slain twice, it appears
> that this was either programmed into the universe or is something
> extratemporal. Yes it has a temporal component but if it has connections with
> the foundation of the universe, then is it historical?
Here too I see no logic that says God is outside of time. Time could have
always existed along with God.
Jim stark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 10 2000 - 21:38:29 EST