6 Day again

I’ve swung back to six day creation again.  more details to follow.

Advertisements

4 comments on “6 Day again

  1. Andrew says:

    Swung back from where?

    One problem I have is whether the 6 days are historical, which I presume is what you mean by ‘6 day again’. Walton, for instance, tries to keep the historical but changes what creation means in the narrative. That’s a possibility worth considering. If, however, the creation narrative is YEC through and through, then I think I would have to say that our knowledge of geology and modern cosmology., such that it is, has falsified the creation narrative.

    • Trent says:

      Walton has ulterior motives. His wife is a biochemist and says so in his bio at Wheaton. Don’t you think he is doing it to make his wife happy? Plus no ANE scholar has bought into his thesis. Alexander Heidel has a far more satisfying conclusion that is the opposite of Walton that he came to 50 years before. Sure the ANE did not care about matter nor its origin (ex nihilio) but the Israelites did.

      • I don’t know who Walton is. My switch was based on the Hebrew exegesis of Genesis 1-2.

      • Andrew says:

        Perhaps he is, I don’t know. On the merits, I’m aware he hasn’t gained wide support. There are good reasons for this, too. My point was about different ways in which 6 day creation could be historical. In that sense, Walton’s view is worth considering. I don’t have a settled position on Genesis 1-3. It could be that YECs are correct in their interpretation.

        I haven’t heard of Heidel but I will try to find his book. As far as I understand it, the doctrine of creation out of nothing came about for theological reasons, not so much from exegesis. Certainly creation out of nothing is the default way in which Christians now read the text.

Comments are closed.