|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: In The Beginning...
|
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I'm not sure what you're wanting to discuss.
Your link seems to suggest some form of "gap theory", in which an indeterminate amount of time (enough to accomodate the geological time scale?) exists between the first two verses and the "let there be light" start of the 6 days of creation. Although the linked site doesn't state that explicitely, nor address the questions of whether the "days" are literal periods of 24h, extended periods, or literary devices that bear no relation to the actual order and timescale of creation.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Snow:
Many would-be literalists do not take these first three verses literally. The YECs make verse 3 equal "the beginning," ignoring the "then" ("and") and sound exposition.
https://textsincontext.wordpress.com/2012/05/03/creation-young-earth-ham-nye-genesis-one/
Host hat on
Biblical literalism is a Dead Horse topic. This is because otherwise every thread in Kerygmania could be de-railed into a discussion of literalism.
If you want to discuss this, post in Dead Horses.
This thread is closed.
Host hat off
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
