Jim Eisele wrote:
> Hi George,
>
> I knew that you would come up with a good explanation :-)
> And, we have little common ground on which to discuss.
>
> But, let's hypothetically say that you wanted to become a
> Baptist (sorry to "tempt" you) :-)
>
> They would say, "Why not just accept it as history?" So,
> I think that you made a good choice to be a Lutheran.
>
> If you ever have a faith crisis, though, God forbid, just
> remember that Adam had 56 children. Now that's a potent
> fairy tale. (Just sticking up for the Baptist-types in the
> world, myself included).
What I meant was, "Don't tempt me to make snide comments about
Baptists."
The present issue - i.e., interpretation of early Genesis and of
6:1-4 in particular - has nothing to do with Baptist-Lutheran
differences. Lutherans from the Missouri or Wisconsin Synod would be in
general agreement with conservative Southern Baptists on the way these
chapters are to be interpreted while some American Baptists would agree
with the sort of approach I suggest.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 28 2002 - 09:39:02 EDT