The resurrection is something that we can’t dispense with and still have Christianity. As you say, this is a place where the pants fall off. Paul hit the nail on the head here: either Christ is raised or else our hope is in vain.

And even though Wright is in and amongst much of the scholarly world of liberal-leaning, he does argue insistently for the actual resurrection of Christ.

And yeah, life was simpler when I thought that I knew everything. Now that I know that I don’t, hopefully I’ll learn humility and faith. Being a cocky ass was much easier.

In the same breath I have to admit that I may never “know” for sure in this life. Oh, for the days of my iron-clad epistemology.

I’ll work my backwards here… You have hit the nail on the head when you say that we don’t want to live with ambiguity. We have this craving to be “right” about everything, and I think that we need to learn the kind of humility that Job 38 and Isaiah 40 should point us towards.

As for the specifics of my interpretation of Genesis 1, I’m a little rusty on that passage. I’d have to consult some notes and things, but from what I remember, you can conceive of the poem beginning at 1:1. I don’t believe it to be a compromise; even Augustine thought that Genesis 1 was metaphorical. When you look at it as having been written in the context of a world dominated by other creations stories, Genesis 1 is an awesome, subversive alternative story of God’s people about how YHWH is God.

It could be true that God created the world in 6 literal days, all the same. I just think that we are missing the point of we insist that that’s what the passage must say.

The deep-seated fear here is that we’re going to explain away the Bible and let science and secular philosophy dictate what the Bible is allowed to say. And this is a truly a problem on which we must bring Scripture’s authority to bear. Unfortunately, Wright does not interact with this issue specifically.

How is one to discern what are the metaphors and what is straight fact? When it comes to the smoke pouring out of God’s nose that is one thing, but how do we suddenly transfer this over to “then God said … and there was evening and morning”?Is the understanding of Genesis as a beautiful poem replete with many metaphors that speak of God’s sovereignty over the other gods a theological compromise based upon the existence of other ancient Creation epics like the Enuma Elish and the Gilgamesh (?) Epic?

I agree that Genesis 1 is not a scientific text. I also understand that science appears to rationally contradict a ‘literal’ (fact based) rather than ‘poetic’ reading of the text. Where then does the poem begin: 1:1? 1:2? 1:3?

This is a fascinating issue that you raise. For me, I have found more comfort in Job 38 and Isaiah 40 when it comes to this particular ‘debate’. Some may think this a cop-out … but this is, frankly, what I believe God is saying to me on the issue. Few people (on any of the many sides of this issue) are willing to live with any degree of ambiguity when it comes to such things.