Re: who is in the details?
Re: who is in the details?
I would take the existence of God as an a priori - perceived intuitively as true. I don’t see that the NT allows both for this and the inverse position - that God’s non-existence can also validly be perceived intuitively as true. The argument through Romans 1:18-32 seems to be that the knowledge of God is something that people train themselves out of - rather than something that is vouchsafed to some but not others.
There is plenty of evidence that challenges my belief in God - particularly the Judaeo-Christian God. I find the evidence that counterweighs this evidence to be more compelling, however. There is evidence in the natural world, but above all, the most compelling evidence is that provided by Christ, his death and resurrection, and especially the experience shared with those who become part of his renewed humanity.
There are all kinds of ways of looking at Genesis 1 - but I don’t see why the primeval conditions of the original creation should not have been different from conditions that have held sway subsequently - so that a six period creation should have been a supernatural act, or series of acts, while subsequent history settles down to conformity to more natural laws. I would add that the changes introduced by Adam’s disobedience also probably affected the natural world, but we have no detail about that in Genesis. So yes, I believe it’s possible to perceive historical truth through Genesis 1 & 2, but it is history presented in a mythical form, and with literary stylisation.
It sounds as if we agree then, in rejecting the True Myth explanation of Genesis 1-3. I wouldn’t want to spend a great deal of time and energy over explanations of Genesis 1-3, except to draw out the timeless truths, and to hold to a personal belief that somewhere in the mists of the mythical presentation, there is historical truth - that God created all that there is, including Adam, and that subsequently Adam fell through disobedience, which has affected us ever since. If God is a supernatural being, he can both override and work through natural laws.
Also, it seems to make sense, to me, to believe that something came from somewhere/someone, rather than believing that something came from nowhere - or it has always existed all by itself.
How do we find the time to indulge in all these wise cogitations?
- Eden pushed back a few thousand years? By: samlcarr (09/02/2008 - 12:41)
- Re: Eden pushed back a few thousand years? By: john doyle (10/02/2008 - 17:56)
- Re: Eden pushed back a few thousand years? By: samlcarr (17/02/2008 - 13:03)
- Re: Eden pushed back a few thousand years? By: john doyle (10/02/2008 - 17:56)
- Pandora's Box of deadly utopias By: samlcarr (24/12/2007 - 10:36)
- Re: Pandora's Box of deadly utopias By: john doyle (25/12/2007 - 02:25)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (04/12/2007 - 20:47)
- To Dominate and to Subjugate? By: samlcarr (13/11/2007 - 15:48)
- Re: To Dominate and to Subjugate? By: john doyle (17/11/2007 - 00:26)
- Re: To Dominate and to Subjugate? By: samlcarr (25/11/2007 - 11:39)
- Option 6: One has to break the egg... By: samlcarr (27/11/2007 - 13:29)
- Re: To Dominate and to Subjugate? By: samlcarr (25/11/2007 - 11:39)
- Re: To Dominate and to Subjugate? By: john doyle (17/11/2007 - 00:26)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: buddy (10/11/2007 - 23:17)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (11/11/2007 - 16:51)
- Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 - Contrasting Natures of God By: samlcarr (22/10/2007 - 14:49)
- Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 - Contrasting Natures of God By: john doyle (23/10/2007 - 18:58)
- Re: Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 - Contrasting Natures of God By: samlcarr (01/11/2007 - 22:13)
- Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 - Contrasting Natures of God By: john doyle (23/10/2007 - 18:58)
- Gender, sexuality and all that stuff. By: samlcarr (07/10/2007 - 20:47)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (27/09/2007 - 16:29)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (28/09/2007 - 16:21)
- Genesis 2-3 By: john doyle (02/10/2007 - 16:15)
- Re: Genesis 2-3 By: jhimm (02/10/2007 - 19:54)
- Re: Genesis 2-3 By: john doyle (03/10/2007 - 13:09)
- you will surely die By: john doyle (05/10/2007 - 19:57)
- Re: you will surely die By: john (08/10/2007 - 21:37)
- Re: you will surely die By: john doyle (09/10/2007 - 23:21)
- Re: you will surely die By: samlcarr (10/10/2007 - 07:43)
- Re: you will surely die By: john doyle (12/10/2007 - 04:29)
- Re: you will surely die By: enarchay (12/10/2007 - 23:32)
- Re: you will surely die By: john doyle (13/10/2007 - 04:08)
- Re: you will surely die By: samlcarr (13/10/2007 - 09:00)
- Re: you will surely die By: john doyle (13/10/2007 - 04:08)
- Re: you will surely die By: john (12/10/2007 - 10:11)
- Re: you will surely die By: enarchay (12/10/2007 - 23:38)
- Re: you will surely die By: john doyle (12/10/2007 - 19:58)
- Re: you will surely die By: enarchay (13/10/2007 - 10:13)
- Re: you will surely die By: samlcarr (12/10/2007 - 08:26)
- Re: you will surely die By: enarchay (12/10/2007 - 23:32)
- Re: you will surely die By: john doyle (12/10/2007 - 04:29)
- Re: you will surely die By: enarchay (10/10/2007 - 07:36)
- Re: you will surely die By: samlcarr (10/10/2007 - 07:43)
- Re: you will surely die By: john doyle (09/10/2007 - 23:21)
- Re: you will surely die By: enarchay (06/10/2007 - 02:02)
- Re: you will surely die By: samlcarr (05/10/2007 - 21:27)
- Re: you will surely die By: john (08/10/2007 - 21:37)
- you will surely die By: john doyle (05/10/2007 - 19:57)
- Re: Genesis 2-3 By: john doyle (03/10/2007 - 13:09)
- Re: Genesis 2-3 By: jhimm (02/10/2007 - 19:54)
- Genesis 2-3 By: john doyle (02/10/2007 - 16:15)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (28/09/2007 - 16:21)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (19/09/2007 - 23:34)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (21/09/2007 - 20:24)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: john doyle (22/09/2007 - 01:58)
- Polytheism or collaboration? By: samlcarr (25/09/2007 - 12:44)
- Garden in the world By: john doyle (25/09/2007 - 15:45)
- Polytheism or collaboration? By: samlcarr (25/09/2007 - 12:44)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: john doyle (22/09/2007 - 01:58)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (21/09/2007 - 20:24)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: Spiritboi (01/04/2007 - 20:36)
- was it or was it not? By: samlcarr (02/04/2007 - 15:46)
- was Adam created immortal? By: john doyle (07/04/2007 - 08:54)
- Re: was Adam created immortal? By: Spiritboi (08/04/2007 - 00:57)
- was Adam created immortal? By: john doyle (07/04/2007 - 08:54)
- was it or was it not? By: samlcarr (02/04/2007 - 15:46)
- The promise of death By: samlcarr (30/03/2007 - 21:09)
- Re: The promise of death By: john doyle (31/03/2007 - 16:49)
- Assuming society By: samlcarr (01/04/2007 - 10:32)
- Re: Assuming society By: john doyle (01/04/2007 - 11:08)
- Assuming society By: samlcarr (01/04/2007 - 10:32)
- Re: The promise of death By: john doyle (31/03/2007 - 16:49)
- recreating myth By: samlcarr (25/02/2007 - 19:55)
- Re: recreating myth By: john doyle (26/02/2007 - 08:47)
- the same old story? By: samlcarr (26/02/2007 - 20:37)
- back to 2nd base By: samlcarr (26/03/2007 - 09:41)
- Re: back to 2nd base By: john doyle (28/03/2007 - 22:17)
- Re: back to 2nd base By: samlcarr (29/03/2007 - 20:12)
- Re: back to 2nd base By: john doyle (30/03/2007 - 09:43)
- God's own country By: samlcarr (30/03/2007 - 10:05)
- Re: back to 2nd base By: john doyle (30/03/2007 - 09:43)
- Re: back to 2nd base By: samlcarr (29/03/2007 - 20:12)
- Re: back to 2nd base By: john doyle (28/03/2007 - 22:17)
- back to 2nd base By: samlcarr (26/03/2007 - 09:41)
- the same old story? By: samlcarr (26/02/2007 - 20:37)
- Re: recreating myth By: john doyle (26/02/2007 - 08:47)
- flashback By: samlcarr (12/02/2007 - 01:15)
- One mankind or two? By: samlcarr (13/02/2007 - 01:27)
- Re: One mankind or two? By: john doyle (13/02/2007 - 23:51)
- Whither Job? By: samlcarr (14/02/2007 - 00:54)
- Re: Northern Kingdom and Southern Kingdom By: freespirit (18/02/2007 - 09:18)
- Whither Job? By: samlcarr (14/02/2007 - 00:54)
- Re: One mankind or two? By: john doyle (13/02/2007 - 23:51)
- One mankind or two? By: samlcarr (13/02/2007 - 01:27)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: gymbrall (02/02/2007 - 18:40)
- almost talmudic By: john doyle (02/02/2007 - 15:16)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (01/02/2007 - 20:02)
- monkey business By: john doyle (02/02/2007 - 11:01)
- Golly! By: peter wilkinson (02/02/2007 - 12:44)
- Re: Golly! By: samlcarr (02/02/2007 - 13:15)
- Golly! By: peter wilkinson (02/02/2007 - 12:44)
- monkey business By: john doyle (02/02/2007 - 11:01)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": By: freespirit (29/01/2007 - 07:32)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: danutz (31/01/2007 - 01:03)
- reading from inside the story By: john doyle (31/01/2007 - 21:08)
- Re: reading from inside the story By: peter wilkinson (01/02/2007 - 15:00)
- open possibilities By: john doyle (01/02/2007 - 15:36)
- Re: open possibilities By: Russ (02/02/2007 - 14:15)
- Creation, sin, death and evolution By: peter wilkinson (01/02/2007 - 17:28)
- open possibilities By: john doyle (01/02/2007 - 15:36)
- Re: reading from inside the story By: peter wilkinson (01/02/2007 - 15:00)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: freespirit (31/01/2007 - 07:23)
- reading from inside the story By: john doyle (31/01/2007 - 21:08)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: freespirit (30/01/2007 - 07:55)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: Russ (31/01/2007 - 00:13)
- swimming along nicely By: john doyle (29/01/2007 - 14:46)
- time and sequence By: samlcarr (29/01/2007 - 17:36)
- Not waving but drowning By: peter wilkinson (29/01/2007 - 17:16)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: peter wilkinson (29/01/2007 - 12:57)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: Russ (28/01/2007 - 20:34)
- Oscillating persectives in the Genesis 1 narrative By: john doyle (29/01/2007 - 11:33)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: dissident (28/01/2007 - 05:10)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (28/01/2007 - 08:58)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: Russ (28/01/2007 - 14:24)
- elohim speaks By: john doyle (28/01/2007 - 18:40)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: Russ (28/01/2007 - 14:24)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: samlcarr (28/01/2007 - 08:58)
- let them enjoy their soup By: john doyle (24/01/2007 - 07:24)
- Time for the next course? By: samlcarr (24/01/2007 - 08:44)
- Re: Time for the next course? By: Russ (25/01/2007 - 00:01)
- two short replies By: john doyle (25/01/2007 - 08:43)
- An alternative literal reading of Genesis 1 By: john doyle (26/01/2007 - 11:00)
- two short replies By: john doyle (25/01/2007 - 08:43)
- Re: Time for the next course? By: Russ (25/01/2007 - 00:01)
- Time for the next course? By: samlcarr (24/01/2007 - 08:44)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: peter wilkinson (23/01/2007 - 22:38)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: peter wilkinson (22/01/2007 - 14:52)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: Russ (22/01/2007 - 22:11)
- Welcome future mythic voyagers By: john doyle (23/01/2007 - 17:51)
- Re: Welcome future mythic voyagers By: samlcarr (23/01/2007 - 19:36)
- Welcome future mythic voyagers By: john doyle (23/01/2007 - 17:51)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: Russ (22/01/2007 - 22:11)
- weighty words By: john doyle (21/01/2007 - 19:17)
- biig mouthfulls By: samlcarr (22/01/2007 - 06:27)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: Russ (18/01/2007 - 23:28)
- higher to lower By: samlcarr (19/01/2007 - 16:40)
- Re: higher to lower By: john doyle (19/01/2007 - 17:09)
- Re: higher to lower By: samlcarr (19/01/2007 - 19:51)
- Re: higher to lower By: Russ (20/01/2007 - 09:57)
- Re: higher to lower By: samlcarr (21/01/2007 - 08:50)
- Re: higher to lower By: Russ (20/01/2007 - 09:57)
- Re: higher to lower By: samlcarr (19/01/2007 - 19:51)
- Re: higher to lower By: john doyle (19/01/2007 - 17:09)
- an alternative Biblical reality? By: john doyle (19/01/2007 - 16:01)
- higher to lower By: samlcarr (19/01/2007 - 16:40)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: Russ (13/01/2007 - 19:27)
- Genesis 1 - Any Possibilities? By: samlcarr (18/01/2007 - 04:01)
- Authorial Intent in the Creation Narrative By: john doyle (16/01/2007 - 12:53)
- 1+2= By: samlcarr (12/01/2007 - 18:40)
- theistic intuition By: john doyle (13/01/2007 - 16:27)
- Re: Genesis 1 as "True Myth": 5 Possibilities By: peter wilkinson (09/01/2007 - 12:55)
- sources of truth about the Creator-God By: john doyle (11/01/2007 - 14:29)
- Re: sources of truth about the Creator-God By: peter wilkinson (12/01/2007 - 06:19)
- who is in the details? By: john doyle (12/01/2007 - 12:12)
- Re: who is in the details? By: peter wilkinson (12/01/2007 - 14:40)
- will the mists never part? By: john doyle (12/01/2007 - 16:20)
- Re: will the mists never part? By: peter wilkinson (12/01/2007 - 18:35)
- will the mists never part? By: john doyle (12/01/2007 - 16:20)
- Re: who is in the details? By: peter wilkinson (12/01/2007 - 14:40)
- who is in the details? By: john doyle (12/01/2007 - 12:12)
- Re: sources of truth about the Creator-God By: peter wilkinson (12/01/2007 - 06:19)
- sources of truth about the Creator-God By: john doyle (11/01/2007 - 14:29)

Guerrilla Worship - Liverpool Flash Mob
Why YOU Should Plant a Church
Contradictions in the Gospels: Problems or Opportunities?
Day One: A Sir Toby's Creation Myth
A Generous Orthdoxy - Brian McLaren
The Lost World of Genesis One - John H. Walton