Unbelievable

Many Christians do not believe that Scripture supports the Young Earth Creationist position. This moderated forum is for good natured scholarly debate.

Moderator: Moderators

Postby Anonymous » Thu Feb 28, 2008 4:05 pm

Peter Henderson wrote:Out of interest, how do you see the parting of the Red Sea ? Can this story be attributed to a geological event and if so what was it ? If it isn't then what are the origins of this story ? Or would you view this a purely supernatural event ? How do you see this Mike ?


I think we should clear up one thing for any readers. The Red Sea referred to in the Bible is most likely not the present day Red Sea. It most likely refers instead to a group of marshes on the outskirts of the Delta. I view the "parting" as a literary construction.
Anonymous
 

Postby Michael » Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:26 pm

Mike Brass wrote:
Peter Henderson wrote:Out of interest, how do you see the parting of the Red Sea ? Can this story be attributed to a geological event and if so what was it ? If it isn't then what are the origins of this story ? Or would you view this a purely supernatural event ? How do you see this Mike ?


I think we should clear up one thing for any readers. The Red Sea referred to in the Bible is most likely not the present day Red Sea. It most likely refers instead to a group of marshes on the outskirts of the Delta. I view the "parting" as a literary construction.


Ditto.

Um er so the exodus did happen - not so way out!
M
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Postby Michael » Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:30 pm

Krijimbesuesi wrote:
All in all, I am left wondering whether the editors of a conservative evangelical journal such as Churchman knew of your general attitude to the historical parts of the Bible when they acepted your article for publication in 1998 - or whether they would have published it had they known.


There has been a sea change in conservative evangelicals over the last 20 years. in the 70s most accepted evolution and in 1998 the extremists like George Curry were taking over. The then editor was happy with my paper, but I sensed problems in the office. Today it would be a no-no

Michael
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Postby Kekerusey » Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:10 pm

Michael wrote:Um er so the exodus did happen - not so way out!


I think it reasonable to assume that scriptural tales have some basis in reality ... whatever it was or wasn't it makes great films :D

Kyu
User avatar
Kekerusey
 
Posts: 271
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 11:38 am
Location: http://www.atheistsheaven.com

Postby Anonymous » Fri Feb 29, 2008 2:49 pm

Michael wrote:
Mike Brass wrote:
Peter Henderson wrote:Out of interest, how do you see the parting of the Red Sea ? Can this story be attributed to a geological event and if so what was it ? If it isn't then what are the origins of this story ? Or would you view this a purely supernatural event ? How do you see this Mike ?


I think we should clear up one thing for any readers. The Red Sea referred to in the Bible is most likely not the present day Red Sea. It most likely refers instead to a group of marshes on the outskirts of the Delta. I view the "parting" as a literary construction.


Ditto.

Um er so the exodus did happen - not so way out!
M


http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/VANSCR.html is an excellent, recent publication on the historical realities and context of the Bible.

For me, the Exodus story was produced for theological reasons to give an emerging culture a united identity.
Anonymous
 

Postby Michael » Fri Feb 29, 2008 4:13 pm

Mike Brass wrote:
Michael wrote:
Mike Brass wrote:
Peter Henderson wrote:Out of interest, how do you see the parting of the Red Sea ? Can this story be attributed to a geological event and if so what was it ? If it isn't then what are the origins of this story ? Or would you view this a purely supernatural event ? How do you see this Mike ?


I think we should clear up one thing for any readers. The Red Sea referred to in the Bible is most likely not the present day Red Sea. It most likely refers instead to a group of marshes on the outskirts of the Delta. I view the "parting" as a literary construction.


Ditto.

Um er so the exodus did happen - not so way out!
M


http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/VANSCR.html is an excellent, recent publication on the historical realities and context of the Bible.

For me, the Exodus story was produced for theological reasons to give an emerging culture a united identity.


Then the nature of teh red Sea doesnt matter 8) 8)

Michael
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Postby Anonymous » Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:21 pm

Michael wrote:
Mike Brass wrote:
Michael wrote:
Mike Brass wrote:
Peter Henderson wrote:Out of interest, how do you see the parting of the Red Sea ? Can this story be attributed to a geological event and if so what was it ? If it isn't then what are the origins of this story ? Or would you view this a purely supernatural event ? How do you see this Mike ?


I think we should clear up one thing for any readers. The Red Sea referred to in the Bible is most likely not the present day Red Sea. It most likely refers instead to a group of marshes on the outskirts of the Delta. I view the "parting" as a literary construction.


Ditto.

Um er so the exodus did happen - not so way out!
M


http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/VANSCR.html is an excellent, recent publication on the historical realities and context of the Bible.

For me, the Exodus story was produced for theological reasons to give an emerging culture a united identity.


Then the nature of teh red Sea doesnt matter 8) 8)

Michael


On the contrary, I think it does matter because it assists in placing the relevant texts in their context.
Anonymous
 

Previous

Return to Scripture Debate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron