Re: The Fall

From: George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
Date: Thu Sep 15 2005 - 17:44:41 EDT

What I was referring to was the explanation in the post by David Bradford immediately below my comments.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: RFaussette@aol.com
  To: gmurphy@raex.com ; david.bradford1@which.net
  Cc: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 5:38 PM
  Subject: Re: The Fall

  In a message dated 9/15/2005 4:29:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, gmurphy@raex.com writes:
    This sort of explanation of Genesis is roughly 2000 years old. Variants can be found in Gnosticism, Origen, some versions of Christian Science &c. Though it's presented here as "realistic" it requires a great deal of arbitrary figurative interpretation. & the notion that our real selves are bodiless spirit or souls is quite unbiblical & flies in the face of - among other things - Christian faith in the resurrection of the body.

    Shalom
    George

  Which explanation do you mean? The one that requires a knowledge of evolution? What do you recognize as an arbitrary figurative interpretation? Please refer specifically.

  Thanks
  rich
Received on Thu Sep 15 17:45:36 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Sep 15 2005 - 17:45:36 EDT