Abstract
A Study on “Hexameron” from the Perspective of Reformed Life Theology
- A Critical Study on Theistic Scientific Interpretation of Genesis One
Cho Jae Pill
(Baekseok University, Christian Philosophy)
This thesis studies about theistic science translation of Genesis Chapter 1’s ‘six day...
Abstract
A Study on “Hexameron” from the Perspective of Reformed Life Theology
- A Critical Study on Theistic Scientific Interpretation of Genesis One
Cho Jae Pill
(Baekseok University, Christian Philosophy)
This thesis studies about theistic science translation of Genesis Chapter 1’s ‘six days of creation’(hexaemeron) in a perspective of Reformed Life Theology with criticism. Reformed Life Theology practices the reformation principle of ‘sola scriptura’. Thus, this thesis criticizes the opinion of modern theistic science about the creation with a Biblical perspective. As a conclusion, I am proposing that hexaemeron need to be translated into literal exegesis. God had created the world in six days with 24 hours a day, as Genesis chapter one says.
This thesis is mostly centered with Young Earth Creationism and Old Earth Creationism, which camps in Evangelism. These two schools have different positions about hexaemeron. Young Earth Creationism translates hexaemeron that God created the world in six days with 24 hours a day with a literal exegesis to the tradition. However, Old Earth Creationism translates the creation with non-literal exegesis and claims that the world was created for a long time and it’s only symbolic. As a conclusion, this thesis proposes Young Earth Creationism and also proposes that hexaemeron needs to be translated into literal exegesis. For this propose, I have processed two big researches: Biblical interpretation methodology of two schools and the validity of literal exegesis of hexaemeron.
First of all, Biblical interpretation methodology of two schools are talked about in Chapter 2. The difference of these two schools are in a different Biblical interpretation methodology. The general Biblical interpretation methodology of Young Earth Creationism is literal exegesis. However, the general biblical interpretation of methodology of Old Earth Creationism is non-literal exegesis.
However, age of the earth is deeply connected with Biblical interpretation methodology for both schools. Young Earth Creationism calculates the ages of the earth with Bible genealogy with literal exegesis. As Young Earth Creationism says, the age of the earth is between six thousand and a million. This proposal confronts the research result of modern natural science.
On the other hand, Old Earth Creationism translates the Bible genealogy with non-literal exegesis. It is because they believe that the Bible genealogy doesn’t provide chronological information. They also claims that hexaemron is provides the age of the earth. Therefore, they translates the hexaemeron in an non-literal exegesis (or symbolic) way. With that result, they harmonize the age of earth with the research result of modern nature science. However, this problem strays them from traditional translation.
The reason of the cause is in the difference of Biblical interpretation methodology of these two schools. The Bible need to be translated into literal exegesis or into non-literal exegesis depend on the character of the Bible. Genesis 1 needs to be translated with literal exegesis. However, Bible genealogy needs to be translated with non-literal exegesis. Therefore, the Young Earth Creationism’s proposal justifies that the world was created in six days with 24 hours. However, it is unjustified to translate the Bible genealogy with literal exegesis for the age of the earth. It is also unjustified of non-literal exegesis translation of Old Earth Creationism to harmonize the age of the earth with Modern nature science. However, translating the Bible genealogy into non-literal exegesis is justified. Therefore, even though the Bible says that the world was created in six days by literal exegesis, this thesis only talks about little hint about the age of the earth or keeps silence.
Theistic science needs to be studied separately from hexaemeron and age of the earth. Hexaemeron needs to be acknowledged by the word of God, and the age of the earth needs to be studied in a scientific studies.
Second of all, the justification of literal exegesis of hexaemeron is talked about in Chapter 3~5.
Chapter 3 talks how the church has been translating hexaemeron through historical studies and literal exegesis traditionally. Through this study, I have found and fix the Old Earth Creationism’s historical problem. Unlike Old Earth Creationism, hexaemeron’s literal exegesis were supported by excellent church leaders.
On Chapter 4, I have made it clear that hexaemeron needs to the translated by literal exegesis. Especially, the word that means ‘day’ is from a Hebrew word ‘yom’ which means 24 hours per day by ‘lexical semantics’. Also, I have studied the context of Genesis 1 by Ancient Near East Studies. From this it turns out that Genesis 1 needs to be translated by literal exegesis as historical text. By this study, I have come to a conclusion that non-literal exegesising the hexaemeron is stubborn.
From chapter 5, I have also made it clear that literal exegesis of hexaemeron is a traditional Christian doctrine. Reformation doctrines states the hexaemeron in a literal exegesis. Also, the literal exegesis of hexaemeron harmonizes with other Theology. Especially, the eschatology have close relationship with literal exegesis of hexaemeron. To deny the doctrine of hexaemeron, you must take responsibly and you must say the appropriate evidence
Through these studies, you should agree the literal exegesis of hexaemeron. Agreeing this tradition doesn’t mean that you are following the old faith simply. However, it is contributing the church and the domain of knowledge. By following the literal exegesis of hexaemeron, you can provide the clue to the alliance of theistic science. Most of all, you can practice the Reformation principle of ‘sola scriptura’. This principle must be also practiced in Science, especially.
: hexaemeron, six days of creation
Abstract
A Study on “Hexameron” from the Perspective of Reformed Life Theology
- A Critical Study on Theistic Scientific Interpretation of Genesis One
Cho Jae Pill
(Baekseok University, Christian Philosophy)
This thesis studies about theistic science translation of Genesis Chapter 1’s ‘six days of creation’(hexaemeron) in a perspective of Reformed Life Theology with criticism. Reformed Life Theology practices the reformation principle of ‘sola scriptura’. Thus, this thesis criticizes the opinion of modern theistic science about the creation with a Biblical perspective. As a conclusion, I am proposing that hexaemeron need to be translated into literal exegesis. God had created the world in six days with 24 hours a day, as Genesis chapter one says.
This thesis is mostly centered with Young Earth Creationism and Old Earth Creationism, which camps in Evangelism. These two schools have different positions about hexaemeron. Young Earth Creationism translates hexaemeron that God created the world in six days with 24 hours a day with a literal exegesis to the tradition. However, Old Earth Creationism translates the creation with non-literal exegesis and claims that the world was created for a long time and it’s only symbolic. As a conclusion, this thesis proposes Young Earth Creationism and also proposes that hexaemeron needs to be translated into literal exegesis. For this propose, I have processed two big researches: Biblical interpretation methodology of two schools and the validity of literal exegesis of hexaemeron.
First of all, Biblical interpretation methodology of two schools are talked about in Chapter 2. The difference of these two schools are in a different Biblical interpretation methodology. The general Biblical interpretation methodology of Young Earth Creationism is literal exegesis. However, the general biblical interpretation of methodology of Old Earth Creationism is non-literal exegesis.
However, age of the earth is deeply connected with Biblical interpretation methodology for both schools. Young Earth Creationism calculates the ages of the earth with Bible genealogy with literal exegesis. As Young Earth Creationism says, the age of the earth is between six thousand and a million. This proposal confronts the research result of modern natural science.
On the other hand, Old Earth Creationism translates the Bible genealogy with non-literal exegesis. It is because they believe that the Bible genealogy doesn’t provide chronological information. They also claims that hexaemron is provides the age of the earth. Therefore, they translates the hexaemeron in an non-literal exegesis (or symbolic) way. With that result, they harmonize the age of earth with the research result of modern nature science. However, this problem strays them from traditional translation.
The reason of the cause is in the difference of Biblical interpretation methodology of these two schools. The Bible need to be translated into literal exegesis or into non-literal exegesis depend on the character of the Bible. Genesis 1 needs to be translated with literal exegesis. However, Bible genealogy needs to be translated with non-literal exegesis. Therefore, the Young Earth Creationism’s proposal justifies that the world was created in six days with 24 hours. However, it is unjustified to translate the Bible genealogy with literal exegesis for the age of the earth. It is also unjustified of non-literal exegesis translation of Old Earth Creationism to harmonize the age of the earth with Modern nature science. However, translating the Bible genealogy into non-literal exegesis is justified. Therefore, even though the Bible says that the world was created in six days by literal exegesis, this thesis only talks about little hint about the age of the earth or keeps silence.
Theistic science needs to be studied separately from hexaemeron and age of the earth. Hexaemeron needs to be acknowledged by the word of God, and the age of the earth needs to be studied in a scientific studies.
Second of all, the justification of literal exegesis of hexaemeron is talked about in Chapter 3~5.
Chapter 3 talks how the church has been translating hexaemeron through historical studies and literal exegesis traditionally. Through this study, I have found and fix the Old Earth Creationism’s historical problem. Unlike Old Earth Creationism, hexaemeron’s literal exegesis were supported by excellent church leaders.
On Chapter 4, I have made it clear that hexaemeron needs to the translated by literal exegesis. Especially, the word that means ‘day’ is from a Hebrew word ‘yom’ which means 24 hours per day by ‘lexical semantics’. Also, I have studied the context of Genesis 1 by Ancient Near East Studies. From this it turns out that Genesis 1 needs to be translated by literal exegesis as historical text. By this study, I have come to a conclusion that non-literal exegesising the hexaemeron is stubborn.
From chapter 5, I have also made it clear that literal exegesis of hexaemeron is a traditional Christian doctrine. Reformation doctrines states the hexaemeron in a literal exegesis. Also, the literal exegesis of hexaemeron harmonizes with other Theology. Especially, the eschatology have close relationship with literal exegesis of hexaemeron. To deny the doctrine of hexaemeron, you must take responsibly and you must say the appropriate evidence
Through these studies, you should agree the literal exegesis of hexaemeron. Agreeing this tradition doesn’t mean that you are following the old faith simply. However, it is contributing the church and the domain of knowledge. By following the literal exegesis of hexaemeron, you can provide the clue to the alliance of theistic science. Most of all, you can practice the Reformation principle of ‘sola scriptura’. This principle must be also practiced in Science, especially.
: hexaemeron, six days of creation
주제어
#hexaemeron
#6일 창조
#창세기 1장
#욤(yom)
#개혁주의생명신학
#유신론적 과학
#젊은 지구창조론
#오랜 지구창조론
#문자적 해석
#비문자적 해석
#지구의 나이
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.