Comments on: Creation in Genesis 1-3 (Part 3–Comparing P & J) http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2009/02/creation-in-genesis-1-3-part-3-comparing-p-j/ Exploring Mormon Thought, Culture, and Texts Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:35:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: mark http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2009/02/creation-in-genesis-1-3-part-3-comparing-p-j/#comment-6230 mark Thu, 16 Apr 2009 10:22:15 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/?p=1509#comment-6230 thanks !! very helpful post! thanks !! very helpful post!

]]> By: john f. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2009/02/creation-in-genesis-1-3-part-3-comparing-p-j/#comment-6229 john f. Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:47:03 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/?p=1509#comment-6229 Yes, I see your broader argument and find it very strong. I just don't know how much the grammatical argument strengthens it in this case. We don't know what the original grammar of this selection was; we don't know the identities of the redactors etc. A grammatical argument of this type works better when such factors are controlled for such as in texts of modern literature. I think your grammatical analysis is correct, and of course I certainly agree with all of your ultimate conclusions about this stuff -- I was just off handedly expressing my own doubts about the strength of this particular approach. Yes, I see your broader argument and find it very strong. I just don’t know how much the grammatical argument strengthens it in this case. We don’t know what the original grammar of this selection was; we don’t know the identities of the redactors etc. A grammatical argument of this type works better when such factors are controlled for such as in texts of modern literature.

I think your grammatical analysis is correct, and of course I certainly agree with all of your ultimate conclusions about this stuff — I was just off handedly expressing my own doubts about the strength of this particular approach.

]]> By: The Yellow Dart http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2009/02/creation-in-genesis-1-3-part-3-comparing-p-j/#comment-6228 The Yellow Dart Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:53:04 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/?p=1509#comment-6228 And I think that Blake's comment does tie in well with what I was trying to say in comment 2. Best wishes, TYD And I think that Blake’s comment does tie in well with what I was trying to say in comment 2.

Best wishes,

TYD

]]> By: The Yellow Dart http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2009/02/creation-in-genesis-1-3-part-3-comparing-p-j/#comment-6227 The Yellow Dart Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:49:05 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/?p=1509#comment-6227 I thought John was here referring to the brief discussion of clause sequencing. TYD I thought John was here referring to the brief discussion of clause sequencing.

TYD

]]> By: Blake http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2009/02/creation-in-genesis-1-3-part-3-comparing-p-j/#comment-6226 Blake Thu, 19 Feb 2009 15:36:52 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/?p=1509#comment-6226 What YD presents isn't grammar but literary form. Confusing the two is not merely a mistake of grammar (grin). What YD presents isn’t grammar but literary form. Confusing the two is not merely a mistake of grammar (grin).

]]> By: The Yellow Dart http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2009/02/creation-in-genesis-1-3-part-3-comparing-p-j/#comment-6225 The Yellow Dart Thu, 19 Feb 2009 14:52:50 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/?p=1509#comment-6225 john f., I think that I have not used grammatical evidence independently. I have made other arguments--literary, historical, cultural, etc.--throughout this series (and I am planning three more segments with additional evidence and argumentation). However, I think that the grammatical evidence here (and in the other segments) is fairly strong and straightforward. Moreover, I think the fact that the grammatical evidence fits together so well with my other arguments is significant. I believe that the strength of my conclusion(s) lies not in any one argument alone, but in the convergence of several lines of discussion. john f.,

I think that I have not used grammatical evidence independently. I have made other arguments–literary, historical, cultural, etc.–throughout this series (and I am planning three more segments with additional evidence and argumentation). However, I think that the grammatical evidence here (and in the other segments) is fairly strong and straightforward. Moreover, I think the fact that the grammatical evidence fits together so well with my other arguments is significant. I believe that the strength of my conclusion(s) lies not in any one argument alone, but in the convergence of several lines of discussion.

]]> By: john f. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2009/02/creation-in-genesis-1-3-part-3-comparing-p-j/#comment-6224 john f. Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:20:20 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/?p=1509#comment-6224 This is plausible but how strong can a grammatical reading actually be? Do authors always use grammar correctly? This is plausible but how strong can a grammatical reading actually be? Do authors always use grammar correctly?

]]>