Allen Roy wrote, in part: "To make a long story short, the conclusion was
that the grammatical structure and use of words in Genesis 1 leave no
room for anything but the clear and unambiguous intended meaning of six
literal 24-hour days."
OK, I'll buy that. That leaves three possibilities:
1. The story is meant to be read as a spiritual truth wrapped up in a
myth.
2. The story is meant to be read as literally true, and is literally
true.
3. The story is meant to be read as literally true, and is not.
Obviously Allen takes possibility #2. His interpretation "trumps" known
science.
Dawkins et. al. take possibility #3, and, partly on that basis, reject
Christianity. A lot of people take that route, rejecting #2 as
intellectual suicide.
I, of course, as well as most Christians, take #1 as the most reasonable
position, given that I must accept Allen's statement above. Which may, or
may not, be true itself. I am suspicious of a person with so much
certainty.
John Burgeson (Burgy)
http://www.burgy.50megs.com
(science/theology, quantum mechanics, baseball, ethics,
humor, cars, God's intervention into natural causation, etc.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 14:12:51 EDT