Re: [asa] the Way Science Works/

George Murphy wrote:

> But to the question "If Genesis 1 isn't literally true, what about X, Y
> or Z?" 1st, one ought to read the texts themselves with care and in the
> larger biblical context & try to determine whether they can consistently
> be read as historical narratives without special pleading, or if it
> seems more reasonable (again in context) to read them in another way.
> 2d, one ought to look at relevant historical & scientific evidence to
> see if there are reasons pro or con for reading them as accounts of
> things that really happened. I.e., we should look at evidence both
> within & outside scripture - internal & external evidence. In the case
> of Genesis 1, the internal evidence shows that both it & Genesis 2
> cannot be read as straight historical-scientific narrative without
> forcing. The external evidence shows that Genesis 1 is not in accord
> with modern scientific accounts of the origin of the universe or living
> things.
>
> Shalom
> George

Well said George. Earlier this year I was at a bit of a loss as to how
to treat Genesis and came somewhat close to considering it a fairy tale.
  I found a copy of Helmut Thielicke's "How the World Began" and found
his treatment of the account as parables helpful. I suspect his use of
parable is close to the area of meaning that Iain is talking about as
myth. I read few volumes of sermons but Thielicke's are worth reading
multiple times even if some elders in my church would dismiss him as not
being "reformed".

Dave W (CSCA)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jul 27 18:36:13 2007