From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (dfsiemensjr@juno.com)
Date: Mon Jun 16 2003 - 00:13:15 EDT
On Sun, 15 Jun 2003 16:02:49 +0200 Peter Ruest <pruest@pop.mysunrise.ch>
writes:
>
> Dave,
> Please be more careful of views you ascribe to others - about
> "concordists" see the email I addressed to Don Winterstein, with CC
> to
> you. All the problems you mention - and many more - are discussed in
> A.
> Held & P. Rüst, "Genesis reconsidered", PSCF 51/4 (Dec. 1999),
> 231-243;
> http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1999/PSCF12-99Held.html
> Peter
>
Sorry, Peter, but I read your paper and was totally unimpressed. I have
noted that concordists have to revise the language of scripture to fit it
into their program. YECs at least have an "explanation" for the waters
above the firmament, though they neglect Psalm 148:4. Both you and they
are in clear error because the sun, moon and stars, set in the firmament,
have to be below the waters above it. Birds fly in front of the
firmament, so it cannot be equated with the atmosphere, where we know
that birds (excepting penguins and cormorants) fly. Concordism reflects a
modern view of the universe, whereas Genesis 1 presumes an ancient view
of the earth and its surroundings. The two views cannot be combined
rationally.
I have encountered a disproof of the Copernican system on a biblical
basis. I have run across flat-earthers. I knew a woman who expressed her
attitude toward intestinal parasites in "I don't believe in worms." Some
people will believe almost anything, often presenting complex
justifications. I, who once accepted concordism, have been forced by the
evidence to conclude that this interpretation of scripture belongs with
other irrational beliefs.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 16 2003 - 00:15:14 EDT