Quote:
Originally Posted by AV1611  Quote:
Originally Posted by Puritan Sailor The problem with your argument is that the other ANE cosmogonies are actually myth not history. They were created to deceive. Thus they cannot function the same way. In many ways, as noted above by Lane, the Genesis narratives are an apologetic against those false myths about origins. That Genesis provides a cosmogeny I will not deny, but Genesis is clearly teaching us not only the origins of Israel but of all mankind.  | You are correct that we should recognise differences between various ANE cosmogonies, and you admit that Genesis provides a cosmogony. That is its genre. Once we have that established we can look to its theological message. I agree that it is polemical, indeed I see its target as both a Canaanite Baal and a Babylonian Marduk but not excluding an Egyptian target also. I see no reason why it should not be a polemical attack on all three. Now whilst it does teach the origin of Mankind, its real focus is on Israel. It is explaining to the Israelite his genesis/origin.
In short, your points do not in any way undermine what I am arguing. I am here focusing upon pointing out that Genesis provides a biblical cosmogony over and against those who deny such a thing and argue it is real history. | No, it's genre is historical narrative. A cosmogony doesn't have to be mythical. It simply provides the meta-narrative for life. In this case, our cosmogony is true, and the grammar and literary style mitigates against any poetic or figurative language.
__________________
Patrick
OPC
MDiv, RTS Jackson.
"He does well, that discourses of Christ; but he does infinitely better, that by experimental knowledge, feeds and lives on Christ." Thomas Brooks.
|