Hi Paul,
----- Original Message -----
From: <PHSEELY@aol.com>
To: <adam@crowl.webcentral.com.au>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2000 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: Methane in the late Archean
> Adam wrote,
>
> << Prior to methane being the major greenhouse gas perhaps the Earth was
> covered in carbon dioxide ice clouds which would act as infrared heat
traps,
> allowing liquid water oceans in the first aeons of the Dim Sun, but would
> totally obscure the heavens. Thus the first creative act of God in
Genesis,
> the creation of the diurnal cycle might imply the creation of life - the
> methanotrophic ecosystem - that preceded the rest of Creation?
> >>
>
> Sorry, Adam,
>
> But Gen 1 is following Mesopotamian motifs and traditions so far as its
> world-picture is concerned. (The divine revelation is in the world-view,
not
> the picture). Any concord between the ancient Near Eastern "universe" of
Gen
> 1 and that of modern science is accidental.
>
I am quite aware of the fact that Genesis follows the science of the day,
Paul, but "accident" is not so pure when we factor God into the picture
surely?
> Note that in Genesis 1 when God does his first creative act, making light,
> there are not "liquid water oceans", but just one ocean covering the
entire
> earth (which does not correlate with modern science). And, the ocean is
not
> there in the "first aeons of the Dim Sun" because the sky itself
(understood
> at the time to be a rock-solid dome) has not yet been made (Day 2), much
less
> the sun (Day 4).
>
But what then is the thick darkness that the Earth is wrapped in aka Job?
And I don't think the ancients conceived the sky-dome as "rock solid"...
isn't it more "hammered out" and likened to a layer of transparent
sapphire???
> Every reference to science in the Bible that I have ever seen is an
> accommodation to the science of the times. The revelation is for the
purpose
> of fully equipping the man of God, as a man of God, not as a scientist.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Paul S.
>
Thanks Paul... I accept what you say, but like the words of the prophets
that weren't understood in their relevance until Christ fulfilled them,
perhaps God has hidden data in the Genesis account for us to divine?
As for the global ocean being incompatible with science I've read that quite
a few geoscientists still hold out on that concept for the earliest aeons of
the Earth - a Panthalassa with mostly submerged proto-continents until c.
800 mya.
That's my perception of what Genesis might be saying to us. Personally I
believe that the ancients held that the light-giving heavenly bodies were
quite distinct to the bright blue dome of day.
Adam
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 04 2000 - 04:11:46 EDT