English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Development of scientific knowledge had previously undermined people’s embrace of the scriptural-text account of creation when cosmology established its explanation of the coming into being of the universe. From the perspective of those who embrace the scriptural-text account, there are two main strands of responses to the cosmological proposition, i.e., first, those who reject it and hold on tightly to the scripturaltext account literally and, second, those who receive it and consequently have to find an alternative metaphorical interpretation of the scriptural-text account. Schroeder’s (1992) evaluation of astrophysical and cosmological principles resulted in an unexpected account that the coming into being of the universe fits into the literal interpretation of the six-day process (six times 24 hours), but that the observation was made from the point of view of an observer present at the very initial stage of the process. The paper concludes that a harmony between scriptural-text and cosmological explanation cannot be achieved without allowing a level of metaphor involvement in the interpretation of the account.

Metaphor or not metaphor: Harmonizing cosmological and scriptural-text account of creation