8.2

Both Michael and Stephanie have mentioned that which struck me most in the William Stafford video. It's interesting to me to see the thought that Stafford put into what details he left out, like in the poem about the child in the woods. I think he said something like he was "not deliberately writing a poem to explain what it feels like to be lost or saved... it's based on curiosity and speculation about what it means to be lost and saved." And more importantly, in my mind, is that Stafford creates "facts" that aren't facts at all, only there for impact, like the ants that pass only on the right.

I'm being obvious. The point being I guess then if we say that Genesis isn't wholly based on "fact" as we come to think of it, then we probably have to accept that the authors were doing the same thing that Stafford was - making choices to give impact.

I suppose what I'm wondering is that if the poem about the child in the woods gives an emotional answer to the question of what it means and feels like to be lost and saved, then what is the question that the authors of Genesis seek to answer in their telling of the story of Abraham and Issac? Having thought that, I ask myself, "Well, what does that story actually make me feel?" (Though I could be missing something due to separation of time and culture.) Foreboding. Fear of a sacrifice I've yet to make. Confidence that God will provide for me? So if that's what I feel... what's the question? (Perhaps I've read too much Douglas Adams...)

To me, I see the answer not as the solution to the question of what will happen to you if you choose to follow this God, but more as a exploration of what it might feel like on any given day, or month, or year. Which is a bit like giving into theological meaning... but anyway...