I can't believe you posted this rot, Matt.Wright criticises American "literalism"? This sort of woolly thinking is exactly what got the British church where it is today. The man on the street can see this man doesn't really believe his own book. It's just another black inky cloud of sophistry to hide rank unbelief.Dear Bishop Wright, was there death before sin? Simple question. Will we get more smoke and mirrors from you?It is exactly this sort of idiocy that has caused the church's confusion over fundamental issues such as women's ordination and homosexuality. Ideas have consequences. To say that these things should be in separate boxes is sheer lunacy.And then he has the hide to call such "literalism" perverse? He needs to do some research. He could even start on my blog.Here's some helpful links:http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/10/dodging-the-silver-bullet/http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/10/how-not-to-read-genesis/http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/08/310/and on the historicity of Genesis 1-3 (ie. it is NOT a poem) see here (under the subheading 'Poetry or Prose'):http://creation.com/the-meaning-of-yom-in-genesis-1I'd give Wright a wide berth on this one.Cheers,Mike
Tee hee, I thought you'd like this :pWhat do other people think? Mike Wells?
Well, you put your hand through the cage bars. I couldn't disappoint.Here's another one:Sweeping Genrelisationsor How Modern Conservative Theologians Unwittingly Use Literary Genres to Mask Their Unbelief http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/28/sweeping-genrelisations/
Post a Comment