http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/537 ... ye/?page=1
I think it wise to try to see writings from within the culture of the author.
Problems mount as we try to force our own cultural and scientific understandings on ancient texts.
Jack West (among others) was famous for trying to make Abraham 3 teach modern scientific principles, with less than stellar results. (Pardon the pun.)
This was when Consig was pro Mormon. I myself had used this argument as an apologist. A question arises however once pondering occurs. It was precisely in regarding the scriptures from within the culture of the authors that helped me grasp the truth we are reading mythology, not revealed truth from an objective outside point of view. The claim is that God revealed truths to them, that is, knowledge God had that they couldn't have had in their own cultural myopia they had no choice to exist within. It is from the outside, with a more real knowledge that revelation is supposed to present, otherwise, what's the point of revelation at all? Within a cultural predilection means, by definition the culture does not have the truth, and hence God condescends to impart actual knowledge and truth which has to differ from the culture he is making his revelation to in the first place.
Because our own culture has surpassed the ancients' views, of course problems arise when we compare the two. But the sacred texts we are supposedly comparing are those which God has revelaed outside impartial and objective truth, not an ancient culture's point of view, else what possible sense does revelation make? If God simply told the ancients what they already knew there could have been no possible progress in actual knowledge could there have been?
From our point of view, it has not been God in much of any manner who has advanced our knowledge via revelation, it has been because we have looked, observed, tested, and confirmed or disconfirmed as to what is true or not. It is no surprise at all that our view is vastly different from the ancient's view. But then, why hold onto their view as if it contained objective truth from a God who had the big picture already and was supposedly presenting that to the ancients? He obviously didn't do it very well.
Jack West's problem was the same as today's Mormon apologists who continue in that silly vein of attempting to show the ancient views presaged our own cosmological understanding. They do not correlate. But if revelation from a God who wants us to know reality and truth that lack of correlation can cause serious cognitive dissonance. Hence, ancient revelation did nothing either for the ancients' understanding reality and truth, nor for us, since we have vastly surpassed their view, and surpassed it with seriously incredible evidence. What else is the only honest possible conclusion than that we are reading ancient myth not revelation of actual and real truth? This is why an appeal to any scripture for truth of what reality is, just doesn't hold as much water as I was taught it will.
Just musing out loud for a few minutes.