Re: Gen 1-11 as history
Sat, 14 Aug 1999 17:25:09 +0000

> Please note my qualifications. I didn't say that there is no geography
>in 1-11 but that it is "generally peripheral" in comparison with the
following chapters.

Define peripheral. It seems to be such a subjective term as used here. I
don't find the Ur to be particularly relevant to Abram's call anymore than
I find Caanan particularly crucial to the Jewish people. It is all
background, i.e. peripheral to the story.

> Final score Glenn 50, Straw Man 0.
> I never said that this "proved" that Noah wasn't historical, didn't exist
&c. I
>said that the accounts about him were of a significantly different
character from those
>about Abraham, Isaac, & Jacob.

I wouldn't beat a strawman if you wouldn't be like jello and squish away
everytime I drive a point home. I have repeatedly asked you to define with
clear and proper definitions of the criteria for which parts of the Bible
are historical and which aren't. You don't seem to have any clearly defined
definitions. Thus You shift around quite a bit because your 'definitions'
are subjective.

Noah lived you say, then what difference does it make that he didn't say
anything? None that I can see. And if Noah lived then what of the events
are they true or false? Where did the flood occur? When did it occur? How
did it occur. If it isn't history we can ignore this. If it is, we can't.
But all you do is simply say some is history and some isn't. THat is so
nebulous as to be unassailable.

> I didn't claim to be presenting any such criterion.

I have observed the lack of criteria for your beliefs that some is history
and some isnt'. I dont' think you have any criteria for differentiating the
two. If you do you are hiding them well.

I was noting some literary
> Your 2 choices, "true or false history", are much too coarse a gradation.
>leave no room at all for literature which contains true history but other
types of
>material as well.

I do leave room for that kind of literature and it is in psalms, proverbes
and the parables. I don't see the same type of style in Genesis. Thus I
want to know how you decide that Genesis is some sort of parable other than
by your personal choice which seems to lack objective criteria.

Give some hermeneutical principles that distinguish something for petes sake.


Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology

Lots of information on creation/evolution