GR>You are not distinguishing what God did in the distant past from how the
GR>writer of the account could relate those events to his contemporary
GR. audience in the less distant past.
GR>What God said is translated in the imperative. The phrase "and there was
GR>light" is not what God said. It is past tense to the author because the
GR>author is quite aware that there is light all around him.
GR>Every one of God's sayings in Genesis 1, is imperative. Time can not be
GR>inferred from an imperative. What is clearly not quotations of God is writt
GR>in the past tense. To the author, everything God did was past tense because
GR>it was all created prior to his existence.
Glenn,
I'd like to understand your hermeneutics for Genesis 1. It
appears that you are saying that it includes God's proclamations
(the imperitive) as prophecy, albeit written later by human hands,
and the fulfillment, as what was observed by the author as
confirmation of the proclamation as an historical record. Is this
correct?
In your opinion, to what extent is Genesis 1 then "theopneustos"
and to what extent can it be attributed to the writer's mind and
observations? How do you distinguish the two? Is this also drawn
along the lines of the imperitive-proclamation and the
observable-historical account of the author?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Putting a question correctly is one thing and finding the answer to it
is something quite different."
Anton Chekhov
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Durham
pdd@gcc.cc.md.us
to: IN:GRMorton@gnn.com
cc: IN:evolution@calvin.edu