Taking the Question Seriously

A reader can close this inquiry before it begins in either of two ways. One is to assume that nothing supernatural ever happens, so ancient accounts of gods and angels must have some other explanation. The other is to welcome the supernatural so eagerly that every resemblance becomes confirmation. Both approaches spare us the work of reading.

We need a more patient way. If a Greek story describes a god approaching a human woman, we can ask what kind of story it is, how early it appears, and what changes as it is retold. If a biblical passage describes heavenly beings, we can ask how its language works and how ancient readers understood it. We can then compare what we have learned.

A Christian reader has reason to admit supernatural agency as a possibility. That belief does not tell us which ancient reports are trustworthy. An event might be possible and still never have happened; a report might be sincere and still be mistaken. Historical judgment depends on the particular evidence.

The same care applies to ordinary explanations. A tale may serve a royal family, express a religious belief, or give poetic form to human desire. These explanations deserve examination. They do not become certain simply because they avoid the supernatural.

The proposed connection between Genesis and Greek heroic tradition must be able to lose an argument. If the dates conflict, the conflict matters. If a resemblance disappears when we read the passages closely, we should let it go. The inquiry has value only while its answer remains answerable to its evidence.