In the junior-high Sunday school which I taught this last Sunday, we read and
discussed Ezekiel and his vision of the dry bones. I resolved ahead of time
that I would NOT broach the subject of whether or not this was a literal event
(though I would gladly discuss it if they brought it up and were curious about
that aspect.) I was delighted when it was not brought up and we focused
entirely on the sole point of his *vision* in the first place: That the "dry
bones" (Israel) could seem a hopelessly dead situation, and yet God promises
that life will be breathed into their "hopeless" situation. I think it tragic
that our exploration of so many Biblical prophecies and passages gets hijacked
by our modern obsession with scientific literalness so that the main points
being communicated get lost; ---and even worse: that we dare to presume that
its historic/scientific truth is prerequisite to our awarding it any further
consideration of deeper profundity or truth.
--Merv
Quoting gordon brown <Gordon.Brown@Colorado.EDU>:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Dehler, Bernie wrote:
>
> > The idea of a firmament is wrong. Same with the idea of the Earth being
> > stationary and unmoveable (it is moving 67,000 mph around the Sun), and
> the
> > universe being geocentric.
>
> In spite of their past use to oppose Copernicanism, I Chronicles 16:30,
> Psalm 93:1, and Psalm 104:5 do not appear to be concerned with celestial
> mechanics. They contain no hint of addressing the relationship of the
> earth to other bodies. The poets appear to be making an analogy with a
> building that is so well constructed that it can't be shaken off its
> foundation.
>
> Gordon Brown (ASA member)
>
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Sep 21 17:51:22 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Sep 21 2009 - 17:51:22 EDT