Do you dare?

[Diamond72]

Science paints the history of the earth completely different that what the Bible says.

Not at all, they are in 100% agreement. It does not honor God at all for you to attack Science. There maybe some truth to your understanding of the Bible. I believe in a literal Bible but then when we grow up we begin to understand a lot of the symbolism that we read in our Bible. I was YEC at one time. Then I was challenged to study and then you have to go where the evidence takes you. Esp. I believe the evidence comes from God.

Actually to believe that Adam and Eve and Noah were all real people that pretty much makes me a YEC.

One thing we need to be careful of is that the atheists like to lie about science and the Bible. But there are YEC people that tells lies about science. So it is pretty much a trade off.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not at all, they are in 100% agreement.

No.

It does not honor God at all for you to attack Science.

I don't attack good science; I attack junk science.

And there are times in the Bible when [good] science didn't even apply.

And there were times in the Bible when [good] science had to stand down and take a back seat to miracles.

There maybe some truth to your understanding of the Bible.

Wow -- thanks.

I believe in a literal Bible but then when we grow up we begin to understand a lot of the symbolism that we read in our Bible.

Yes -- it's called "Biblical maturity."

I was YEC at one time.

I was never a YEC.

Then I was challenged to study and then you have to go where the evidence takes you.

Yes, and what did Paul warn could happen to those who embrace evolution?

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

Are you a Homo sapiens?

If you think you are, then you're professing yourself to be wise, aren't you?

Esp. I believe the evidence comes from God.

Re the Creation Week, there was no evidence generated.

Actually to believe that Adam and Eve and Noah were all real people that pretty much makes me a YEC.

There's more to being a YEC than believing Adam & Eve were real people

Much more.

Your definition of a YEC needs some work.

One thing we need to be careful of is that the atheists like to lie about science and the Bible.

I agree.

But there are YEC people that tells lies about science.

YEC people are ... well ... YEC people.

I'm the closest thing to being a YEC you can come to.

In fact, our pastors are YECs, and I have a lot of respect for them.

I just can't bring myself around to being one, myself.

So it is pretty much a trade off.

Between YECs and OECs ... yes.

 

[Diamond72]

I don't attack good science; I attack junk science.

Bring it on, show me what you got. I am ready for you to show your evidence to expose "Junk Science".

Between YECs and OECs ... yes.

This is not one or the other when they are both true at the same time.

Yes, and what did Paul warn could happen to those who embrace evolution?

Theistic Evolution does not really endorse Darwin. Darwin’s theory of natural selection is often described as an undirected process, which contrasts with the theistic evolution perspective that sees divine direction in the evolutionary process. This means that while theistic evolutionists accept the scientific evidence for evolution, they also believe that God has a role in guiding this process.

We are told that God declares the end from the beginning. This is more like evo devo. This can be seen as a more directed process, which might resonate with the idea of a divine plan guiding evolution from start to finish. There maybe junk science but the Bible shows us the good science compared to the junk.

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

Read the passage. "They neither honor or glorify God". For me Theistic Evolution does MORE to honor and Glorfy God then to try to cling to old outdated Bible interpretations what have been proven to be wrong.

There's more to being a YEC than believing Adam & Eve were real people

Much more.

We can keep going over this but your mind still is not going to grasp what we are talking about. YEC and OEC are both true at the same time. Literally with no allegorical modifications. Two simultaneous, yet different time periods.

The beginning to the appearance of man took six days and 15 billion years simultaneously starting a the same instant and finishing at the same instant. Physics has proven this to be true. Einstein demonstrated that when a single event is viewed from two frames of referance a thousand or even a billion years in one can indeed pass for days in the other.

There is no time at the speed of light. According to Einstein’s theory of relativity, as an object approaches the speed of light, time dilation occurs. This means that time effectively slows down for the object in motion relative to an observer at rest. At the speed of light, time would theoretically stop altogether.

In the Book of Genesis, the creation of light is described in the very beginning. Specifically, Genesis 1:3-5 states:

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day12.

Are you a Homo sapiens?

Homo sapiens is the species to which all modern human beings belong. The name means “wise man” in Latin. Homo sapiens are characterized by their highly developed brains, which enable complex thought, language, and problem-solving abilities12.

What is the problem?

I am using the book Genesis and the Big Bang by Gerald Schroeder as reference. He has a PhD from MIT. So he knows a lot more about physics than I do. Although I have a fair understanding of the physics of light because that is what I did when I worked in theater and ballet. That is what I studied in college.

 

[Diamond72]

And there were times in the Bible when [good] science had to stand down and take a back seat to miracles.

God is a God of JUSTICE. He does not violate His laws, he restores them. This is why miracles are so difficult to prove because everything looks normal. It is difficult to prove that anything was ever broken and needing fixed. Remember the expression dead ringer for dead people that were given a bell in case they were not really dead but just looked like they were dead.

The law of attraction, suggestion and positive thinking says that miracles are manifestations of our mind. They use this a lot in sports to try to manifest the winning team.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Gadamer, Derrida and How We Read

​

That helped, Thanks, Philo. I recall the theme of "play" and "to-and-fro" or "give and take". "We have to be willing to listen."

Is Gadamer too positive about tradition? I have not read him to really know. But I think we all must admit that we a have been shaped by tradition so naturally it shapes our interpretation and understanding. How great to be aware of this in our reading. I think it is quite easy to forget and read "unconsciously".

"Both thinkers saw texts as constituted not by dead letter but by living words." I think of Jesus saying, 'My words are spirit and life." I think any words that touch us and stir us are living. As I started reading Crime and Punishment I was asking myself, do I really want to read this? It seems so dark, dead and depressing.

How about that situation where a speaker or writer says something and it is interpreted differently than intended. Who owns the meaning?
Can a meaning be erroneous? We see it most often when something is taken out of context. Usually for other purposes. "Sloppy ways of reading." Let's all try to avoid that. I know I would be perturbed if someone took and used my words in a way that I did not intend. No wonder celebrities are up in arm about AI.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Hey Akita

Yo, Rosie, good to hear from you.

I've been following along since my last post. I believe I've shared this before, a post-exilic date does not necessarily mean it cannot be rooted in historical truth. (For example just because my great great grand-children write my biography doesn't necessarily mean that what they write about me would necessarily be a lie, as opposed to my grandchildren. Of course the reason for writing could be different and how they choose to share that information could impact how it's viewed as well). So either ealier or later dates could be argued, which would not necessarily impact the historical truth. Which I think 2Philo has been pointing out.

But don't you think something like the creation narratives are beyond historical truth claims? One would have to be supposing divine revelation to the author. And, of course, many do, literally. I just don't see it with Genesis I & II. Beyond that there certainly can be historical roots in characters and stories. As I said before, I do not require it for my appreciation of those characters and stories.

On further elaboration of what you meant in your OP, which you shared later. I still viewed it as your request/dare to posters to search for different ways of reading the text, not necessarily throwing out the historical, but holding it in tension with others. (I could have been misunderstanding this).

Your further elaboration had me crossing the bridge from ancient to modern, where I understood it as reminiscent of ministry in refugee camps or homeless shelters, where elements of exile are forefront. Could the text resonate with those enduring these circumstances ? (I do ministry with the homeless). People from different walks of life, and for different reasons are suffering and displaced. Some are encountering this situation due to their own disobedience, where others are victims of unjust circumstances, or fleeing violent situations.

The stories are complex and alot more nuanced than we care to admit. Its tempting to assume a single experience applies universally, but the biblical motif of exile/displacement speaks uniquely to each situation. For some exile is because of disobedience like Adam and Eve and Israel as per your OP. For others exile is due to no fault of their own, framed within a larger context, like Joseph also an exile separated from home also framed within a larger context, no fault of his own.

These varying situations does raise fundamental questions, Who is God, where is God and what does my situation tell me about who this God is. If He reveals Himself in His Word, where is He?. Is He just?? Or perhaps like Hagar who is "exiled" twice, her own decision to run from an abusive situation where she is both victim and perpetrator, and then again exiled for the sake of the Promise.

Amazing ministry you do! Congratulations. And what is also fabulous is that you bring this level of reflection, recognition and appreciation. Truly letting the life of scripture enlighten the present.

In a sense, the biblical stories resonates with our lived experiences. Its much like the view of Nancy Eiland. "Encountering the disabled God", She found solace in the Scriptures portrayal of what she termed as the "disabled" God, very provocative and unheard of.

Thanks for the Nancy Eiesland reference.

But for her, it meant that Christ shared in her suffering. This could also be viewed as allowing the text to interpret me. I.e reading the text with the understanding that it is a two way mirror, revealing who He is, and who we are. It reveals how we measure against the standard of Christ. But also as in Nancy case and ours, how we perceive the Word, discovering how Christ shares in our humanity.

Everyone has a different reference point. And although the author-intent is discovered by historical-grammatical methods of interpretation. The principles in the text is discovered for our application. But I do believe a reader-response reading is beneficial especially when we consider the complexity of human experience and a desire to search for what God says about it.

Touching on liberation theology. Pushing the limit of how we understand divinity. "understanding that it is a two way mirror, revealing who He is, and who we are." A God who is crucified, humiliated and mocked. What a "dangerous and provocative" God that must be. And yet, that is why I choose him (or he chose me) rather than other religions I have a feel for. We so glibly talk about Jesus as the Son of God without really much of a clue about what we mean by "God" and "Son". That is where I think deconstruction really helps. Let's take it apart and see how it ticks. But, we are also talking about a person here, a relationship with a person. So again with the to-and-fro. I guess back and forth with the hear and intellect.

I also find that the personal practice of divina lectio in a sense falls within this category. Employing both methods is what brings about the most value imo.

Yes! this is the most excellent method of sitting with the text, open, listening. So much more can happen.

In addition, we should be aware of our own bias (although this self-awareness is itself subjective).

For example I can easily read certain passages as liberating, because of my history, one lens through which I view Scripture. Its easier for me to perceive how Christ approaches those less fortunate, those oppressed. But I have to balance it with another view or another perspective, as much as he came for the oppressed, he also came for the oppressor. For both the less fortunate and the fortunate.

For as much as we think we are only the victim, we are also the perpetrator.

The "other" I will have to go back to David Tracy on this. How we let the "other" become the enemy. On another thread her in evangelization there is a discussion about people with "hardened hearts". They refuse to listen to us. Can you imagine?

What I further, understand what you meant by your OP and a different hermeneutic is being able to discern that reference point and redirect it to Christ.

Biblical narratives may be able to resonate with varied circumstances and situations. Therefore be a means of offering hope. So yes not either/or but both/and.

Thanks for the thread. Apologies for the long post, it had me thinking.

"Redirect to Christ" Surely he is the Rosetta stone. Even in the origin accounts, call for order, obedience yet recognition of grace.

 

[AV1611VET]

Bring it on, show me what you got. I am ready for you to show your evidence to expose "Junk Science".

Want more?

 

[AV1611VET]

God is a God of JUSTICE.

What does that have to do with creatio ex nihilo?

He does not violate His laws, he restores them.

What law did God use to create the earth from nothing?

This is why miracles are so difficult to prove because everything looks normal.

God cleans up after His "messes."

And when God cleans up, God ... cleans ... up.

Adam: You came from one of my ribs.
Eve: Show me the scar.
Adam: I can't. God healed it.
Eve: Okay. I'll take your word for it.

Bible: The Flood was world-wide.
Academia: Show me the watermarks.
Bible: God cleaned up the mess.
Academia: Suuure ... suuure.

 

[Derf]

But you argue to take it literally. How is that a strawman?

"It"? Do you mean every word literally? No I don’t, nor does anyone. There are such things as metaphors, as poetic or apocalyptic language, etc. But that doesn’t mean we get to pick and choose what is poetic based on our own expectations. For instance, when David fights Goliath, there’s no reason to say that Goliath never existed, at least, there’s no reason from the text to say that. Or that David never existed. Do you think David existed? Was he a king of the combined Israel? Or are those things merely “created narrative” from legends and myths? If the latter, what would drive you to think that David was made up by the post-exilic Jews to make them feel better about their beginnings (even though not fully true)?

 

[Diamond72]

What law did God use to create the earth from nothing?

God did not create something from nothing. At the beginning of time was Hydrogen and Helium and a tiny bit of lithium. Is there a scripture you are referring to in regards to "something from nothing"? I would be glad to take a look to see what the Bible says about this.

What law did God use to create the earth from nothing?

Usually this is referred to as astrophysics. Before the laws of physics they talk about quantum physics.

Adam: You came from one of my ribs.

Eve did not come from his rib, she came from his side. I am pretty sure you have no interest in theistic evolution so there is no reason to talk about that. I did my study on that because I wanted to know why God created Adam and Eve. Of course this is a type of Christ and His Bride. In order to understand one, I think we need to understand the other. God wants us to know, He wants us to understand the work He is doing.

Eve: Okay. I'll take your word for it.

Science does it's part to explain what was going on and what God was doing. So we know the reason for why we have generations.

Show me the watermarks.

I think Eden is under the Persian Gulf. So you are gonna need your scuba gear or a underwater camera. They do sell underwater drones now that are much improved from when they discovered the Titanic. So maybe someday an archeologist will discover some evidence for Eden.

 

[Diamond72]

No I don’t, nor does anyone.

I do, I believe in a literal Bible.

what would drive you to think that David was made up by the post-exilic Jews

They say that Adam lived 930 years because he gave David 70 years. We are very close to the Kingdom age and the birth right for the kingdom is from David. A perpetual birth right for all the ages. Not only does Jesus have to descend from Adam it is very important the Mary descended from Eve. I read and study the generations in the Bible. Most people skip over them so they do not know what the generations are all about.

 

[Diamond72]

Want more?

I know you can come up with a lot of junk science. There are also junk Bible interpretations like something from nothing. This is why we need both science and the Bible so they can confirm each other and we can know what is true. Moses and Abraham exposed a lot of Junk Science. Einstein explains to us how the earth can be 6,000 years and billions of years old AT THE SAME TIME. It is one thing to look back on time. It is something different to go to the beginning of time and look forward. As a child looking forward life seemed like an eternity. Now as we look back be careful not to blink because our life went by so fast. That is why time is relative depending on our viewpoint and perspective.

 

[AV1611VET]

God did not create something from nothing.

Eve did not come from his rib, she came from his side.

I think Eden is under the Persian Gulf.

I think our differences are too great to have a meaningful discussion.

It's been nice chatting with you.

I have a feeling you've invested a lot of your treasures into the world of science, and I'll leave it at that.

 

[AV1611VET]

Einstein explains to us how the earth can be 6,000 years and billions of years old AT THE SAME TIME.

Einstein can take a hike.

I've been saying for almost twenty years here that the earth is as old as God willed it.

But however old it is -- 3 billion, 4 billion, 10 thousand -- it has only been in existence since 4004 BC.

 

[Diamond72]

I think our differences are too great to have a meaningful discussion.

Ok, that is fine. You can pick and choose if you want. We see that in the Amish (Mennonite) where they pick and choose what they want from science and the modern world. Sometimes they change churches to find one that is more in line with what they believe and sometimes they adapt themselves to what their church believes.

I have a feeling you've invested a lot of your treasures into the world of science, and I'll leave it at that.

I would not be alive if it were not for science and neither would you. So I was taught not to look a gift horse in the mouth. But if you want to, that is fine, you are free to do what you want. I want to draw closer to God and get to know Him better though all that He gives us to help us understand.

God gave me a dream when I was 8 years old. That has a lot to do with what I believe. What I learned in that dream about the universe.

 

[Diamond72]

But however old it is -- 3 billion, 4 billion, 10 thousand -- it has only been in existence since 4004 BC.

Then you would know, what came first, the chicken or the egg?

BTW I keep saying it is 4004BC plus one week. For you it would be 4004 minus a day sense Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day. I believe Jesus went to Calvery 4,000 years after Adams transgression.

 

[AV1611VET]

God gave me a dream when I was 8 years old. That has a lot to do with what I believe. What I learned in that dream about the universe.

Shades of Emanuel Swedenborg!

 

[AV1611VET]

Then you would know, what came first, the chicken or the egg? ;

The egg.

 

[Diamond72]

Shades of Emanuel Swedenborg!

He made significant contributions to various fields, the modern concept of an expanding universe emerged much later.

 

[Diamond72]

The egg.

Did that egg have a genetic mutation that produced the first Chicken?