It won't really satisfy most evangelicals either. But, one can adopt Hyers'
approach to some extent without *completely* giving up on the notion that
Gen. 1-11 has any historical basis. For example, look at John Walton's NIV
Application Commentary on Genesis. He does a skillful job, IMHO, of taking
note of literary genre, the text's basis in ANE cosmogony, and the principle
of accomodation, and of being very careful about what type of narrative this
is, without calling these stories mere fiction or allegory. Not to say
Walton has it exactly right, or that his approach solves every problem, but
just to note that there are evangelical commentators who deal thoughtfully
with genre without perhaps going quite as far as Hyers. Another nice thing
about Walton is that as a Wheaton guy and given that this is an NIV
commentary, it carries at least a little bit of evangelical streed cred.
I'd also recommend C. John Collins' commentary on Gen. 1-4 and Peter Enns'
Inspiration and Incarnation as examples of evangelical efforts in this
regard.
On 1/30/07, Ted Davis <TDavis@messiah.edu> wrote:
>
> Great questions, Louise, and I agree they are likely to come up.
>
> One of the key points to make, in response, is that not all parts of the
> Bible are of the same literary genre, so the appropriate way to read a
> creation story is not the appropriate way to read a Pauline letter or Acts
> or Matthew.
>
> As for the resurrection, I cannot myself account for the combination of
> "empty tomb" and "appearance" stories, and of early church history,
> unless,
> a literal bodily resurrection actually took place. I believe with NT
> Wright
> and many others, that it is the best hypothesis, that no others really
> will
> do the job when all things are considered. And the non-historicity of
> Jesus
> and the disciples I take as absurd, rather like suggesting the
> non-historicity of Aristotle (though some works attributed to him are
> pseudonymous) or, for that matter, King David. The latter (the claim that
> David was a figment of the Hebew imagaination) is quite popular in some
> circles, but for purely political reasons related to the modern Middle
> East;
> there is actual archeaological evidence that he existed, according to my
> brother (an ancient Near east archaeologist).
>
> And NT writers can refer to tradition in various ways; it isn't always
> clear whether their references are fully historical or more
> literary--indeed
> it isn't always clear that this distinction would have occured to them.
>
> That won't please the sceptical fundamentalist, obviously, but it might be
> the truth.
>
> Ted
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
-- David W. Opderbeck Web: http://www.davidopderbeck.com Blog: http://www.davidopderbeck.com/throughaglass.html MySpace (Music): http://www.myspace.com/davidbecke To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.Received on Tue Jan 30 17:57:31 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jan 30 2007 - 17:57:31 EST