Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
No Figurative Markers to Support Non-Geocentric Claims in Joshua 10
No Figurative Markers to Support Non-Geocentric Claims in Joshua 10
A prayer was offered up for the sun to stand still. The prayer was answered and declared so. The Sun did not appear to stand still to all observers, else we have inspired writers of Scripture writing untruths. The text in question does not pertain to different perspectives in a narrative, but to narration. To claim there is inspired and uninspired speech in the narration is to claim that the penmen were not fully inspired. Such a view as yours undermines the verbal-plenary inspiration of Scripture. Further, there are no literary markers whatsoever in the Johua 10 account that point to metaphors or phenomenology as devices at work.
Those who hold heliocentricity usually avoid the idea of "error" in this passage by saying that the passage is simply accommodated to the way people thought at that time; and now that we are supposed to know better we can understand what is said as speaking according to the senses. On that explanation, though, there is no figure of speech. It is understood to be a literal statement which speaks according to the way the senses perceive things.
You will never be able to say with any degree of certainty that anything is true on the basis that the Bible teaches it while you allow that the Bible accommodates its teaching to the mistaken notions of men. Your doctrine of inspiration is not orthodox so long as you do not consider the suppression of the penmen's errors to be an active part of it. You will simply never know what is absolute truth and what is mere accommodation. Like the liberal, the canon of reason is required to distinguish where Scripture speaks truth and where it accommodates error.
Now if you are saying it is not an accommodation, but that it utilizes figurative language then the figurative language tactic is clearly negated by the fact that Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still, and God answered the prayer in terms of the sun standing still. Again, there are no figurative markers in the text. And, finally, it is clear that external considerations raised by secular science are being thrust upon the interpretation of the text.
Think of the consequences if your possibility was actually entertained. The liberals would have all the justification they need for explaining away the miraculous in the Bible since everyone to whom the Bible was written thought in terms of the miraculous. The Holy Spirit didn't know whether the Earth rotates or not when He inspired this passage? Yikes!
God is the vantage point here. He answered His servant's prayer. If God was simply accommodating Joshua's misconception, then who knows what is true!
AMR
No Figurative Markers to Support Non-Geocentric Claims in Joshua 10
No.
A prayer was offered up for the sun to stand still. The prayer was answered and declared so. The Sun did not appear to stand still to all observers, else we have inspired writers of Scripture writing untruths. The text in question does not pertain to different perspectives in a narrative, but to narration. To claim there is inspired and uninspired speech in the narration is to claim that the penmen were not fully inspired. Such a view as yours undermines the verbal-plenary inspiration of Scripture. Further, there are no literary markers whatsoever in the Johua 10 account that point to metaphors or phenomenology as devices at work.
Those who hold heliocentricity usually avoid the idea of "error" in this passage by saying that the passage is simply accommodated to the way people thought at that time; and now that we are supposed to know better we can understand what is said as speaking according to the senses. On that explanation, though, there is no figure of speech. It is understood to be a literal statement which speaks according to the way the senses perceive things.
You will never be able to say with any degree of certainty that anything is true on the basis that the Bible teaches it while you allow that the Bible accommodates its teaching to the mistaken notions of men. Your doctrine of inspiration is not orthodox so long as you do not consider the suppression of the penmen's errors to be an active part of it. You will simply never know what is absolute truth and what is mere accommodation. Like the liberal, the canon of reason is required to distinguish where Scripture speaks truth and where it accommodates error.
Now if you are saying it is not an accommodation, but that it utilizes figurative language then the figurative language tactic is clearly negated by the fact that Joshua prayed for the sun to stand still, and God answered the prayer in terms of the sun standing still. Again, there are no figurative markers in the text. And, finally, it is clear that external considerations raised by secular science are being thrust upon the interpretation of the text.
Think of the consequences if your possibility was actually entertained. The liberals would have all the justification they need for explaining away the miraculous in the Bible since everyone to whom the Bible was written thought in terms of the miraculous. The Holy Spirit didn't know whether the Earth rotates or not when He inspired this passage? Yikes!
God is the vantage point here. He answered His servant's prayer. If God was simply accommodating Joshua's misconception, then who knows what is true!
AMR
