Which hermeneutical stances result in a literal reading of Genesis, and what are the main justifications offered for these stances' applicability to the text of Genesis?
I cannot answer this question within the forum guidelines. The issue causing the divide is deeper than the hermeneutics. It has to do with the very nature of Scripture and of God's relationship to humanity. What I can say is that I personally would not trust a hermeneutic that treated Genesis differently than the remainder of scripture.
Maybe it is more about presuppositions. Do I want to understand the text as it is written, in its context and applied in the whole bible (scriptura sui ipsus interpres) and what God wants to communicate.Or do I need to reconcile my exegesis with current theories on naturalist basis, that are most commonly held in the mainline scientific community.
Available Now
Build your biblical library with a new trusted commentary or resource every month. Yours to keep forever.
