A question for my theistic evolutionist friends

[shunyadragon]

Please quote exactly where you feel I have overstated any conclusions of Westermann's commentary!

My reading or that of any other exegete or theologian appreciative of exegesis is only nebulous for those who do not desire to read and understand the texts, especially in the languages in which they are written. To criticize such a reading without even hearing it is akin to ignorantly judging a book by its cover. Similarly, I did not merely provide you with names of 'talking heads' but described for you a school of thought developing within the Christian tradition for nearly 2,000 years that would not be neglected by anyone attempting to have a properly theological understanding of Christian doctrines. Of course, <snip snip>

You have failed to present a coherent argument with citations, other than 'my reading,' which gets you nowhere.

[robrecht]

You have failed to present a coherent argument with citations, other than 'my reading,' which gets you nowhere.

Untrue. The citation of the summary Catholic exegesis by Francis Schüssler Fiorenza supports my view completely. You have offered not a single reason to dismiss his opinion or excellent credentials, but merely dismiss it as 'talking heads'. If you are willing to enter into the details of my reading of Genesis, I have expressed my willingness to guide you through the details and justification, and the invitation still stands, but you prefer to denigrate that without even knowing the specifics of my reading or its justification. Then you ignorantly accuse me of of overstating conclusions of Westermann's commentary without knowing anything either of Westermann's commentary or of my reading of Genesis and, when challenged to quote me as anywhere overstating any conclusions of Westermann's commentary, you are unable to back up your accusation with a single quote. Such is the state of your ignorant polemics and yet you try to deflect attention away from your nonsense by claiming that others have failed. Pathetic. Why not just drop the pretense and enter into an educational dialogue?

[shunyadragon]

Untrue. The citation of the summary Catholic exegesis by Francis Schüssler Fiorenza supports my view completely. You have offered not a single reason to dismiss his opinion or excellent credentials, but merely dismiss it as 'talking heads'. If you are willing to enter into the details of my reading of Genesis, I have expressed my willingness to guide you through the details and justification, and the invitation still stands, but you prefer to denigrate that without even knowing the specifics of my reading or its justification. Then you ignorantly accuse me of of overstating conclusions of Westermann's commentary without knowing anything either of Westermann's commentary or of my reading of Genesis and, when challenged to quote me as anywhere overstating any conclusions of Westermann's commentary, you are unable to back up your accusation with a single quote. Such is the state of your ignorant polemics and yet you try to deflect attention away from your nonsense by claiming that others have failed. Pathetic. Why not just drop the pretense and enter into an educational dialogue?

Which post?

[robrecht]

Which post?

What exactly are you requesting? It is I who have requested you to quote where you think I have overstated conclusions of Westermann's commentary.

[shunyadragon]

What exactly are you requesting? It is I who have requested you to quote where you think I have overstated conclusions of Westermann's commentary.

The citation of the summary Catholic exegesis by Francis Schüssler Fiorenza

[robrecht]

See my Post #245: "... See, for example, the synopsis by Francis Schüssler Fiorenza in Systematic Theology: Roman Catholic Perspectives, 2011, p. 389:

“But the single most important conclusion of Catholic biblical studies relative to original sin consists in breaking down the misinterpretations of the story of Adam and Eve and their "fall" as a descriptive historical account, and breaking it open as an interpretation of ourselves.”

Note that Fiorenza, Professor of Roman Catholic Theological Studies at Harvard Divinity School, previously studied under Karl Rahner, Johann Baptist Metz, and Joseph Ratzinger (before he became Benedict XVI) so he is fairly well acquainted with modern Catholic theology and exegesis. ..."

To which you erroneously responded in your Post #246: "I will take note of this for future reference."

Since it was apparent that you had not understood the quote, I repeated it for you in my post #247.

I am now requesting for the fourth time that you attempt to substantiate your false claim that I have supposedly overstated any conclusions of Westermann's commentary (see already my Posts #s 255, 257, 259).