Journal: Westminster Theological Journal
Volume: WTJ 68:2 (Fall 2006)
Article: Cosmology In Historical Context
Author: Noel K. Weeks

---

WTJ 68:2 (Fall 2006) p. 283

Cosmology In Historical Context

Noel K. Weeks

Noel K. Weeks is an Honorary Senior Lecturer at the University of Sydney in Sydney, Australia.

Biblical interpretation, especially when we are considering more contentious issues, often experiences a tension between allowing due weight to the uniqueness of the biblical text and interpreting the text against its historical background. One extreme threatens to interpret the text as though it had no historical context, the other to absorb into the teaching of the text the general views of the surrounding cultures. Debate is further complicated by the treatment accorded to those elements that are alleged to be common at the time the text was written. We might once again construct a contrast. One possibility would emphasize linguistic or literary features appropriated from an existing stock as part of the way the unique message is conveyed. Alternatively, we might posit time-bound and erroneous elements that enter the text because of the historical circumstances of its composition. Many other variations and possibilities exist.

An area in which such questions frequently arise is that of physical cosmology. Is the cosmology presupposed or even taught by the biblical text a definitive revelation or an expression of the ideas of that time which we now believe to be erroneous? I will examine this question by looking first at the presuppositions of those who equate the biblical view with that of the surrounding cultures and then at the actual arguments.

I. Presuppositions of the Argument

Invoking the historical context of Scripture might entail a commitment to either historical relativism or to progressivism. Historical relativism claims that all truths and eras are time-bound. Therefore our statements are every bit as bound to their time as those of the ancients. Both the Scripture we defend and the tools we use in that defense lack absolute overriding truth and authority. While a popular non-Christian position, historical relativism conflicts at too many points with a Christian position to be seriously considered in this discussion.

Progressivism sees the positions adopted later in history as improvements upon or corrections of earlier ones. Once again this can be seen in a relativist

WTJ 68:2 (Fall 2006) p. 284

sense: since our present positions will in turn be corrected, it makes little sense to argue for them. Most progressivists, however, think in terms of definite advance: what we now know is true and what former ages believed was wrong. Applied broadly, this is once again an attack upon any form of Christianity based on the Bible. Therefore, when used by Christian apologists, the things which are seen as time-bound t...

visitor : : uid: ()