Historical Christadelphian Approaches - 5: Difference between revisions
From Reconciling understandings of Scripture and Science
Jump to navigationJump to search
m (Pfgqae moved page Historical Christadelphian Approaches - 5'' to Historical Christadelphian Approaches - 5 without leaving a redirect) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
<div text align="right">Next: [[Historical Christadelphian Approaches - 6|“In the beginning{{3dots}}”]] →</div> <div class="noautonum">__TOC__</div> | <div text align="right">Next: [[Historical Christadelphian Approaches - 6|“In the beginning{{3dots}}”]] →</div> <div class="noautonum">__TOC__</div> | ||
==5. The language of early Genesis== | ==5. The language of early Genesis== | ||
===<span id="1"></span>5.1 Appearance and language of the day=== | ===<span id="1"></span>5.1 Appearance and language of the day=== | ||
It has generally been accepted as a principle in the past that the meaning of a Divine text should best be understood on the basis of how those to whom it first came and was read, would have received it. In addition, it has been recognized that the Bible is not written in scientific language. | |||
===<span id="2"></span>5.2 Early Genesis as Ancient Near Eastern literature?=== | ===<span id="2"></span>5.2 Early Genesis as Ancient Near Eastern literature?=== | ||
===<span id="3"></span>5.3 Other approaches=== | ===<span id="3"></span>5.3 Other approaches=== | ||
Revision as of 21:18, 7 July 2019
← Index of
Early Genesis, A review of historical Christadelphian approaches
- by Bro Ken Chalmers, January, 2016
Next: “In the beginning. . . ” →
5. The language of early Genesis
5.1 Appearance and language of the day
It has generally been accepted as a principle in the past that the meaning of a Divine text should best be understood on the basis of how those to whom it first came and was read, would have received it. In addition, it has been recognized that the Bible is not written in scientific language.
5.2 Early Genesis as Ancient Near Eastern literature?
5.3 Other approaches
Next: “In the beginning. . . ” →
