Allen Roy wrote:
>
> > The second presentation
> > was by David Fouts on Discontinuity in Genesis One, which resulted in
> > massive note-taking by a number of us. He discussed the various forms and
> > ways in which 'yom' is used throughout the Bible as well as the use of
> > 'evening and morning,' 'and it was so,' 'let there be,' and the word
> 'min'.
> > 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. The
> > last presentation of the first morning was by John Mark Reynolds who
> > discussed the philosophical foundations of discontinuity, with special
> > emphasis on the Greek philosophers.
A classic example of missing the forest for the trees. It's like doing
a detailed grammatical analysis to show that hodo in Lk.10:31 can mean only a
literal road & then concluding that the story of the Good Samaritan is
historical narrative. >s between basic life forms predates Darwin and has been
>
> > He also presented two novel ideas (at least to me). The first was that we
> > might want to consider the question 'why' in relation to a basic type.
> For
> > instance, "Why was the dog type created?" His response was that is might
> > have something to do with the Creator revealing something about Himself -
> in
> > the dog type perhaps companionship. Felines were perhaps expressing
> > something about majesty (although the housecat may simply be trying to
> fake
> > it..grin - my comment).
& cockroaches? I don't think much of independent natural theology in
general but there is natural theology & then there is natural theology. In
comparison with this, Paley was a Doctor of the Church.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 20:28:14 EDT