Re: Vatican

From: George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
Date: Wed Nov 16 2005 - 20:30:44 EST

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: RFaussette@aol.com
  To: gmurphy@raex.com ; janmatch@earthlink.net ; asa@calvin.edu
  Cc: panterragroup@mindspring.com
  Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 8:19 AM
  Subject: Re: Vatican

  In a message dated 11/15/2005 11:11:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, gmurphy@raex.com writes:
    Knowing that it's fruitless to argue with Rich, I'll point out for the benefit of others that this claim is purest non sequitur. There are certainly other choices between than "6 days" and "myth/allegory."
   What are the other choices, George, and why won't you present them and argue them instead of saying its fruitless to argue with Rich?

  In my previous post I said, inter alia, "We might think of Barth's description of the Genesis accounts as "saga." They are fundamentally theological statements that indeed contain some mythic elements but are hardly pure myth." These are a couple of alternatives (not mutually exclusive) that I already pointed out. "Liturgy" is another, suggested by the style of Gen.1 - & in fact some scholars have argued that it was used as part of a New Year's celebration. Some concordists (though certainly not I) would argue that Gen. 1 & 2 present an elementary scientific account of origins,m though not a literal 6 day one. This list isn't exhaustive.

  I'm not arguing at present that any of these are correct but just that there are clearly many alternatives besides the ones you suggest.

  Of course you may just be using "myth/allegory" in a sloppy way to mean "anything other than literal 6 day creation." In that case your claim reduces to "either 6 days or not six days" & is an uninteresting tautology.
   
  Not only do you not present an alternative, you comment on the point I least care about in my entire post, a point that was tangential to the main idea which is that canonicity goes out the window once you abandon the 6 day creation

  All this really means is that you abandon the concept of canon so you can appeal to the Gospel of Thomas. Many theologians & many churches don't believe 6 day creation & do accept the canon. There is no necessary connection of the sort you describe. E.g., the Roman Catholic Church accepts the canon (Cathechism of the Catholic Church, paragarphs 120 & 138) & understands the 6 days to describe "the work of the Creator symbolically" (paragraph 337).

  I have nothing further to say here &, having been warned appropriately against excessive posts, will conclude.

  Shalom
  George
  http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
Received on Wed Nov 16 20:33:21 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Nov 16 2005 - 20:33:21 EST