Incredulous Logic

[Ryft]

If you didn't want this brush applied to you, then you shouldn't have offered the verse as justification for the notion that such a thing as "fixed laws of heaven" existed and could be discovered.

You generalized Christian apologetics as possessing a common thread of concordist approaches to interpretation, a broad-brushing attempt which faceplants against those schools of apologetics that repudiate concordism as anachronistic and indefensible. It is concordist approaches that fall prey to your criticism regarding the Jeremiah passage—that the "fixed laws" mentioned therein correspond to empirical laws—a criticism that fails to find its mark when aimed at me. It has nothing to do with whether or not I want that brush applied to me; it simply does not apply to me, regardless of my feelings about it. As my answer to you indicated, the "fixed laws" pertain to covenant theology, not material cosmology.

I simply pointed out to you that those laws would have been the laws postulated by the Babylonians, and specifically the Chaldeans.

Thus we have your claim. Now we need your demonstration. Provide the exegesis showing that those are the laws Jeremiah was talking about.

The cosmology of the Isrealites is ... not a revelation from God ...

Of course not. The object of revelation is God. Scripture is his self-revelation; that is, God revealing information about himself, who he is and what he is doing. While the subject or context varies, the object is always God and his self-disclosure. It is concordists who think otherwise. It is they who would tell you that the Jeremiah passage reveals something about the universe, whereas I told you it reveals something about the covenant God of creation and of Israel.

I assume you're linking Walton because you believe that I have a literal interpretation of Genesis, or that I believe the Bible's purpose is supposed to have been a science text?

Your assumption is incorrect. I referenced Walton because I believe you are unfamiliar with non-concordist approaches to biblical exegesis. For example, you are elaborating upon ancient Near East cosmologies as if that might somehow be new to me, as if I am not already familiar with things like the Egyptian Memphite Theology, the Babylonian Enuma Elish, the Hittite Kumarbi Cycle and so on. My Walton reading list was intended to not only indicate that you are not dealing with someone ignorant of these issues but also to introduce you to Christian biblical scholarship that is not concordist.

... without the aid of your particular fairy. ...[snip additional personal insults]

Such rational integrity from an atheist. Always so refreshing.

Where are you, Adrian? You never stooped to these levels. Get active here again. Please.