From: bivalve (bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com)
Date: Tue Dec 10 2002 - 13:44:29 EST
I am sufficiently uncertain about the definition of "broken myth" to
think that a definition would be helpful in this discussion. Could
George (or anyone else) provide it? Perhaps a bit on the technical
sense of myth would also be appropriate.
Otherwise, folkth may myth the point.
Thanks!
Dr. David Campbell
Old Seashells
University of Alabama
Biodiversity & Systematics
Dept. Biological Sciences
Box 870345
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 USA
bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted
Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at
Droitgate Spa
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Jay Willingham" <jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:23:04 -0500
>
>> > Jim wrote:
>> >
>> > " ...With a few exceptions, I think
>> > most of this list has accepted Gen 1-11 as mythology/exaggeration.
>> > It's gotten a little boring to talk about."
>
>....
>
>> >
>Jay Willingham wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm coming in on the tail end of this, but I believe I am one of the
>> > "few exceptions".
>> >
>> > How few are we?
>
>.......
>
>joel anderson wrote:
>>
>> No idea - but, me too. And yeah, the miracles of the NT too. ( I even
>> believe it is genuine leather :) ) Following the discussion freedoms and
>> limits in Schaeffer's "No Final Conflict", I think there is tremendous
>> range within Christendom for understanding the history of Genesis 1-11.
>>
>
>.....
>
>Indeed.
>
>Christians do have a tendancy to get all wound up over how many angels can
>dance on the head of a pin and whether Jesus owned the clothes he wore.
>
>Thereby we miss the point.
>
>God bless you all this Advent...
>
>Jay Willingham, Esquire
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Dec 10 2002 - 15:59:23 EST