RE: Dick Fisher's "historical basis" remains no less doubtful

>>>>>Jack wrote
  Another problem is the serpent.

  I am sure there are fossils of serpents, i.e. crawling creatures with no
legs, prior to 7000 BC or so.

  I dont know how this would manifest itself in the fossil record but I
imagine childbirth was painful before that time as well.

  So, the account in Genesis, up through chapter 3 must be non-literal. At
least the effects of the fall I think are not to be taken literally. I
think that there needs to be a literal historic Adam. And I suppose he was
singled out of the other humans that were around at the time, and placed in
the garden. But there are too many parts of the story of the fall of man
that must be mythological, the tree, the fruit, the serpent, the effects of
original sin, etc. At this point, I think the literal historical narrative
begins in chapter 4.

  [Don]

  Concerning "pain", does anyone have knowledge or evidence to suggest that
other species can feel pain on an emotional level? I realize that many
other species may feel pain on a physical level. Even a cat cries out
during child birth, but do they have any long lasting emotional consequences
of it? Humans of course have memories of such events on an emotional level
and as a result may fear situations where pain is anticipated (i.e.
anxiety).

  While I would agree that at the very least most parts of Genesis 2 are
figurative, they may not necessarily be mythological. The serpent even in
Egyptian mythology is considered the opposition to Ra (the sun god). Where
the sun god and YHWH are considered good, Lucifer and the serpent are
considered evil. Evil does exist and so does Lucifer. As for whether he is
in fact a serpent, doubtful. Would this then be mythology or just a
metaphor?

  Don P
Received on Sat Nov 20 23:45:08 2004