Further support for this palace-temple conceptualisation is found in the final act of creation: the forming of humanity, male and female, in the image of Elohim. Long the subject of debate, the image of God language makes a great deal of sense within the palace-temple context. After all, what is the last thing placed inside the deity’s house, if not his image? So here in Genesis 1 on the last creative day, Yahweh fashions his own image and places it in his palace-temple.
...
This, it seems to me, is nothing other than the ancient version of the recently formulated Anthropic Principle, which in its various forms reflects the fact that the fundamental structures of this world, the observed values of its cosmological and physical quantities, appear to have been fine-tuned with human existence in view. To observers both then and now there are strong hints that this creation was designed for us. And Genesis 1’s answer, it seems to me, is not so much concerned with the "how" in the technical or mechanical sense as it is with the "who," namely, Yahweh.
A couple of quotes from Making sense of Genesis 1 by Rikk Watts. As seen on dead apostle.
- Peace
2 comments:
I favor an "entropic" anthropic principle, because it answers all the questions without any of the crackpot theories.
The universe is flat, (the way that it is), because this is the most efficient configuration for evenly dissipating energy.
The universe needs intelligent life... because humans make particles from vacuum energy... which holds the universe flat and stable as it expands, so Einstein's finite and closed model isn't unstable after all.
Richard you need to remeber that Rikk Watts is theologian working with ancient texts so he may have a different perspective on "recently formulated" that we tech geeks.
- Peace
Post a Comment