OEC vs. YEC Debate

Paull33,

[ad hominem argument deleted], I would have to agree with him regarding the literal meaning of Ex. 20:11. The preposition "in" is clearly implied and I don’ know of any competent scholar of the Hebrew Scriptures who would say otherwise. This verse is not misunderstood because fundamentalist extremists “interpret ‘in’ to mean God created the universe ‘in’ six days,” but because the text literally says that “in six days [tetragrammaton] made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day” and fundamentalist extremists come to the faulty conclusion that God said that He created the world in six literal days.




[ February 16, 2005, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: Phillip ]

 

What I'm saying, Craig, is that YEC interpret Ex. 20:11 to mean that God created the universe in six days. And they specifically point to "in" six days.

Yes, they misinterpret what God made in six days. They also point to "in" as if they have found the "proof" for their interpretation.

That's all that I'm saying.

God did do something in six days. He fashioned the sky, land, seas, and all that is in them. Exactly what Genesis 1:3ff says He did.

And there are many fine Hebrew scholars who would interpret Ex. 20:11 as "For six days God . . ."

 

Jason,

I was answering Craigbythesea's appeal to authority. He said that there were no competent Hebrew scholars who would interpret Ex. 20:11 as "For six days God . . ." He is wrong. I was pointing that out. Therefore, in context, this was not an appeal to authority but refuting an appeal to authority.

You assert something to be true, but have yet to prove it from the text. I argue from the text, and you call it an argument by assertion.

Get real.

 

This is the second time you have stated that you are not discussing this further. You then proceed to make your points all the while hiding behind your false assertion that you are not going to continue this debate.

 

Paul, I understand the point you're trying to make, but am not sure why you hold there's some great significance concerning "in". Even you wrote:

Unless I horribly misunderstand you, even you are saying He did whatever He did in six days.

 

[ February 16, 2005, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: Phillip ]

I believe that we need to take up a collection and buy Phillip a dictionary! In the meantime,

Main Entry: 1ad ho•mi•nem
Pronunciation: (')ad-'hä-m&-"nem, -n&m
Function: adjective
Etymology: New Latin, literally, to the person
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made
(Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary)

Phillip’s mutilation of my sentence radically distorts what I said and suggests that I did something that I did not do, so please disregard that sentence.

 

Isn't this one of the cases where you should take the simplest interpretation as the meaning, rather than trying to build something out of it to fit a scientific theory?

An obvious clear reading is that He created the Earth and the Heavens in 6 days. Obviously, the difficulty is that we will never be for certain if God is referring strictly to the "sky" (atmosphere) or everything that is considered "heavens". Universe, planets, earth and atmosphere.

The text has nothing to imply that the earth was not created from scratch and just an addition to the "foundations" of the earth.

If I were to say I built a house in three month, wouldn't most of you assume that I meant the foundation, the clearing off of the lot, leveling and all preparation would be considered with that too? Now, if I were to say that I build the house in three months, but the foundation was already built six months earlier; then we would have an exception. Regardless of the articles found or not found in the Hebrew, I see NOTHING that points to a non-literal understanding of Exodus and I also do not see that every scholar who has translated a Bible has failed at this point. IMHO

 

I wrote,

Paul responded,

Paul, my point is that none of them would deny that "in" is clearly implied. If you disagree, please quote a scholar of the Hebrew Scriptures who would agree with you.

However, I can not risk having a moderator distort my posts by editing them and falsely accusing me of using an ad hominem argument, so unless Phillip repents, I am out of this thread.

 

Until we learn not to refer to each other as "baboons" and until we can learn to post to each other on the level of some sort of humanity in respect and dignity of the "other" poster---I will shut this thread down immediately.

Moderators who wish to reopen the tread---please let me know beforehand as to your reasoning why!

Brother David