>> I guess that the way we all read and interprete the Bible is based to
>> a large extent on our personal backgrounds and experiences but, in my
>> opinion, the creation stories don't appear to be an historical narrative
>> at all. They have a definite mythological (I'm not using the word in a
>> perjorative sense) flavor to them.
>
> I'm *not* committed to the YEC position - I lean to the day-age view - but
> I would be interested in what you see that gives the creation account a
> "mythological flavor." To me, a plain reading of the text yields plain
> statements of historical fact. Would your interpretation be the same if the
> scientific evidence was neutral regarding the age of the earth?
A quick reply late at night (and I'm leaving tomorrow to present a paper at
a conference so I can't reply again until next weekend)...
Talking serpents, God strolling in the garden enjoying the breezes, the
animals marching onto the ark two by two, God forming man out of clay, the
building of a tower to reach to heaven, etc. all seem to me to give Genesis
1-11 a "mythological" flavor. I would say that beginning with Genesis 12,
your statement about a plain reading would be true but not for the earlier
chapters.
I do think it would be easier to be a YEC if I had no training in science.
- Steve.
-- Steven H. Schimmrich Callsign KB9LCG s-schim@uiuc.edu Department of Geology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 245 Natural History Building, Urbana, IL 61801 (217) 244-1246 http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/s-schim Deus noster refugium