Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Revdpickrel AT wmconnect.com]

In a message dated 4/18/2006 11:42:49 AM Central Daylight Time, 
kwrandolph AT email.com writes:


> Doug:
> 
> Now you mention the day=age theory. This is what 
> I say that the text excludes. As one Christian 
> literalist told me, "The question is not what God 
> could have done, but what did God SAY he did?"

No, I don't believe text excludes day = age.  In every lexicon (Hebrew, 
Greek, English) I own day may be rendered as age, eon, etc.


> 
> You bring in things from outside the text. You 
> mention Einstein, modern science, the frozen flora 
> and fauna found in the tundra of Alaska and Siberia 
> (earlier message) and you claim that God is "the 
> Master Scientist". The last brings up the question, 
> do modern scientists follow the same science as 
> God? If not, then the statements of the Master 
> Scientist should take precedence over the claims 
> of modern scientists. 

Only because it confirms Scripture.  Science and Scripture are in agreement.

> 
> As far as Einstein is concerned, back in my college 
> days I commented to physicist friends that I had 
> trouble with the image of atoms as described by 
> quantum mechanics, and gave an alternate 
> description based on experiments: their answer was 
> the quantum mechanics was not a description, rather 
> just a series of mathematical models which worked, 
> but could very well be wrong. In fact, they said 
> that my understanding fits the experimental data 
> better than did the mathematical models of quantum 
> mechanics, but in order for my understanding to be 
> accepted, I would have to "do the math" - make 
> mathematical formulae that would describe what the 
> experiments show. Well, I'm not good at math (much 
> to the disgust of my math prof father) so that was 
> out of the question. (An interesting (to me) 
> sidelight: when I disagree with evolution, 
> biologists get all emotional and accuse me of 
> attacking science; but when I attack quantum 
> mechanics, physicists quietly evaluate and discuss 
> what I say. The difference is: evolution is a 
> deeply held religious belief that masquerades as 
> science, while physics is science.) Recently I 
> found a site, http://www.commonsensescience.org 
> where a group of scientists apparently have done 
> the math that I was unable to do.

You're a physicist, I'm not, and it would be folly for me to try and discuss 
physics with you.  I have studied Scripture since the 40's (Th.B, Th.M., and 
Litt.D) and I admit I'm unqualified to discuss physics with you or Kirk, yet 
you feel qualified, even enthusiastic to correct me in biblical things.  I am 
willing to learn, but you're going to need to show me something first.  You 
told 
me you became a scholar by studying Hebrew.  A linguist scholar in Hebrew 
doesn't impress me.  What would impress me is a linquist scholar willing to 
push 
the biblical envelope to explore beyond tradition.

> 
> The conclusion I draw is that the text of Genesis 1 
> describes a six day creation where each day is the 
> equivalent of a 24 hour day. It is immaterial to 
> the discussion whether or not anyone believes 
> this description, what Einstein said or other 
> discoveries that may or may not have been made, 
> what we have here is a linguistic question asking 
> for a linguistic answer. I read years ago, I think 
> it was in a book by Dr. Bolton Davidheiser, biology 
> prof then at San Jose Sate University, that a 
> creationist organization sent letters to profs of 
> Hebrew at major universities throughout the U.S. 
> asking the question, "day" when connected to a 
> number, as in Genesis 1, does it mean the 
> equivalent of a 24 hour day, or could it mean a 
> long period of time? Of those who answered, the 
> unanimous response was that it referred only to a 
> day, and that an age is not indicated. I personally 
> have seen nothing that contradicts that assessment.
> 
> Karl W. Randolph.
> 
Good for you, Karl.  You have my blessing.

Doug

Rev. Doug Pickrel, Litt.D.
Tejas Valley
San Antonio, Texas