Posted: Oct 10, 2010 3:14 am
by TimONeill
quas wrote:Wait, I need a little clarification here.

Earlier on you said: "William still believed that Genesis was true, just that it wasn't a literal description of what happened scientifically."

Now you said: "A Catholic like William of Conches could take the bit about God creating Adam out of dust figuratively and no-one batted an eyelid."

So which is it? Did William believe Genesis to be a true historical account? Or did he not?

"Which is it?" Both sentences are saying exactly the same thing - he took it figuratively, not literally. He believed it was true, but not scientific. Just as a modern non-literalist Christian believes that what Genesis says is true, but that we shouldn't understand it as a literal description of exactly what happened and how.