• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

I thought this was rather clever...

Status
Not open for further replies.

staveoffzombies

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2006
710
33
40
Near Dayton, Ohio
✟23,542.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
My brother began to dictate in his best oratorical style, the one which has the tribes hanging on his words.

"In the beginning," he said, "exactly fifteen point two billion years ago, there was a big bang and the Universe--"

But I had stopped writing. "Fifteen billion years ago?" I said incredulously.

"Absolutely," he said. "I'm inspired."

"I don't question your inspiration," I said. (I had better not. He's three years younger than I am, but I don't try questioning his inspiration. Neither does anyone else or there's hell to pay.) "But are you going to tell the story of the Creation over a period of fifteen billion years?"

"I have to," said my brother. "That's how long it took. I have it all in here," he tapped his forehead, "and it's on the very highest authority."

By now I had put down my stylus. "Do you know the price of papyrus?" I said.

"What?" (He may be inspired but I frequently noticed that the inspiration didn't include such sordid matters as the price of papyrus.)

I said, "Suppose you describe one million years of events to each roll of papyrus. That means you'll have to fill fifteen thousand rolls. You'll have to talk long enough to fill them and you know that you begin to stammer after a while. I'll have to write enough to fill them and my fingers will fall off. And even if we can afford all that papyrus and you have the voice and I have the strength, who's going to copy it? We've got to have a guarantee of a hundred copies before we can publish and without that where will we get royalties from?"

My brother thought awhile. He said, "You think I ought to cut it down?"
"Way down," I said, "if you expect to reach the public.
"
"How about a hundred years?" he said.

"How about six days?" I said.

He said horrified, "You can't squeeze Creation into six days."

I said, "This is all the papyrus I have. What do you think?"

"Oh, well," he said, and began to dictate again, "In the beginning-- Does it have to be six days, Aaron?"

I said, firmly, "Six days, Moses."
 

busterdog

Senior Veteran
Jun 20, 2006
3,359
183
Visit site
✟26,929.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Easy to make up. Hard to prove.

I am not sure of the intent, either. Is it to suggest that Genesis is best explained by corrupt human processes? That is, not that the content has miraculously survived by the Holy Spirit, but that the content in the first place was the product of people being cheap, or otherwise frivolous about the content?

This is what many expect of evolutionary theology: these types of conclusions. I hope someone will clear this up and show that these prejudices are in error.
 
Upvote 0

artybloke

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
5,222
456
66
North of England
✟8,017.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Politics
UK-Labour
I am not sure of the intent, either.

Then think about the first audience of the book of Genesis. Do you really think they'd be up to hearing about the Big Bang Theory, abiogenesis, the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution, punctuated equilibrium etc etc? They were however familiar with lots of different stories full of exciting gods and goddesses and heroes and heroines doing exciting things.

The first audience had no maths, no literacy to speak of, no scientific method to check the story with. They did however have imaginations. Why is it so difficult to imagine that God used the imaginations of ancient writers to stimulate the imaginations of their audience in order for them to follow the true God, rather than a lot of false ones?

Is the imagination so dangerous, God isn't allowed to use it?
 
Upvote 0

busterdog

Senior Veteran
Jun 20, 2006
3,359
183
Visit site
✟26,929.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Excuse me, I would appreciate some clarity here.

For evolutionists it may be all well and good to take lack of sophistication and muddle it together with casual disregard for the truth. It may be. I am tending to think it is so, since no evolutionist will answer the bell on this question. Your post certainly suggests that mistake. You do understand the difference, I hope, though you have written otherwise.

I keep hearing from evolutionists that they exalt the Word of God as much as creationists. I keep hearing that they revere it and regard the Word as communicating the truth. If you think the laziness of an author really could have had such a substantial impact on Biblical content, I think we find some clarity on how "exalted" scripture really is within this view. Elsewhere maybe you do a wonderful job. The confusion exhibited here, however, is appalling.

Understand what has been said here. This is not Shakespeare axing half a scene of MacBeth, a character already well drawn and rich in content. This is the subject and character of the work, namely creation, being informed mostly by laziness, if not mere chance, in an author's habits.

Nothing in what we know of the scribal traditions supports that view, first of all. These were about the most disciplined human beings that one could imagine. So, the freakin' assumption made in the OP is so much elephant feces thrown at the Madonna upon the assumption that if anything sticks, it deserves a healthy NEA grant. The OP is not art, but whim. There is no historical basis for it.

Further, there are several deliberate choices from which the author retreats. That retreat is not into a better, more aristic and concise rendering. The mythical author simply descends into obfuscation out of convenience. Hello?

Wake up and smell the coffee.
 
Upvote 0

Citanul

Well, when exactly do you mean?
May 31, 2006
3,514
2,689
46
Cape Town, South Africa
✟271,150.00
Country
South Africa
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Single
I am not sure of the intent, either.

The OP is actually an Isaac Asimov short story. So I would guess that the intent was to write something a magazine editor would be willing to buy, and nothing more than that.
 
Upvote 0

busterdog

Senior Veteran
Jun 20, 2006
3,359
183
Visit site
✟26,929.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The OP is actually an Isaac Asimov short story. So I would guess that the intent was to write something a magazine editor would be willing to buy, and nothing more than that.

Here is a joke that is not theologically offensive.

Two Romans are standing at the foot of the cross. One says to the other, Sure he was a great teacher, but he didn't publish.

As Homer Simpson says, Its funny because its true.

What exactly is the OP? If it was a joke, or whimsy, its not that funny. I don't think it was really a joke at all. Though, the idea of a joke provides cover for a bad OP.

If those hear want to take it as just goofy and not "clever", fine.
 
Upvote 0

artybloke

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
5,222
456
66
North of England
✟8,017.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Politics
UK-Labour
For evolutionists it may be all well and good to take lack of sophistication and muddle it together with casual disregard for the truth. It may be.

What casual disregard for the truth? Is a work of imagination not the truth? Or does truth only exist if it can be verified "scientifically"? Don't poets and storytellers deal in truth?

Again, I ask: why can't God stimulate the imagination of the writers of Genesis to tell stories that would appeal to the listeners of their age?


I keep hearing from evolutionists that they exalt the Word of God as much as creationists.

I think we exalt it more, because we don't try to shoe it into a post-enlightenment view of "factualness"; we see it for what it is: a great work of art, as well as a fountain of spiritual truth.

If you think the laziness of an author really could have had such a substantial impact on Biblical content
"Laziness of the author?" What does this mean? You mean it was "lazy" of the author to create a great work of art? As a poet and writer, and as a reader of fiction and poetry, a frequenter of the theatre and art galleries, I feel insulted that you so disparage the writers of Genesis artistic talent in that way. It is not lazy to use your imagination.

What is it with this fundamentalist hatred of the imagination? Why is it wrong for the book of Genesis to be a work of imagination rather than history? You still haven't answered that question. In fact, nobody has.

If the book of Genesis is poetry, fiction, parable or allegory rather than factual, it doesn't stop it from being true. In fact, I would suggest that it makes the truth it imparts much deeper, more spiritual, more real, than if it were factual.
 
Reactions: gluadys
Upvote 0

shernren

you are not reading this.
Feb 17, 2005
8,463
515
38
Shah Alam, Selangor
Visit site
✟33,881.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
In Relationship

For you it may be all well and good to take simple sheer scientific ignorance and muddle it together with lack of sophistication. Don't let anyone be fooled for a second by this.

Haven't you really let your hand show here? artybloke said nothing about "sophistication". Indeed, he talked about them having imagination, and it takes imagination to have sophistication. You don't need to know science to be sophisticated, as any modern novelist will show you; you don't need sophistry to be scientific, as you will find out from any episode of Star Trek.

The fact is that we are not calling the Israelites bumpkins. (A modern country bumpkin probably has at least a car and metal fittings in his house - more science than the typical Israelite could ever dream of.) Indeed, you need to be sophisticated both to write stories and to appreciate them. You need to be sophisticated to look at a story and, instead of believing in knee-jerk fashion that the author is automatically making some kind of scientific statement about the world we're in (and then either damning him for being wrong or absurdly striving to prove him right) - because science is the only thing you'll look to for guidance - delve into the author's worldview and cosmogony and see what points he's trying to make with the materials he has at hand.

In other words, God was sophisticated enough to take the pagan, uninformed, darkened myths of the time and turn them into vehicles to communicate His divine message. And the Israelites were sophisticated enough to get it. You, however ...
 
Upvote 0

artybloke

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
5,222
456
66
North of England
✟8,017.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Politics
UK-Labour
Indeed, you need to be sophisticated both to write stories and to appreciate them.

You can tell from the great dearth of good fundamentalist poetry & fiction just how unsophisticated most creationists are. The ancient writers of Isreal, however, with their subtle understanding of story, poetry and myth, had far more sophistication than any modern day creationist.
 
Upvote 0

busterdog

Senior Veteran
Jun 20, 2006
3,359
183
Visit site
✟26,929.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
 
Upvote 0

artybloke

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
5,222
456
66
North of England
✟8,017.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Politics
UK-Labour
Let's look at Alice in Wonderland. Nontruth (fantasy) is tailored carefully to make a point (truth) about reality
Fictiion is not nontruth. The best fiction (whether fantasy, allegory, parable, poetry, is a species of truth.

If you want to cite an artistic view of creation, post away.
Read Genesis Chap. 1.
 
Upvote 0

busterdog

Senior Veteran
Jun 20, 2006
3,359
183
Visit site
✟26,929.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

"Me however" dealt some serious literary criticism. You want to talk about a completely different issue regarding science in the scriptures. And you want to get the word "sophistication" out of context.
 
Upvote 0

shernren

you are not reading this.
Feb 17, 2005
8,463
515
38
Shah Alam, Selangor
Visit site
✟33,881.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
In Relationship
Well, if I may be honest, I thought the OP was a touch too crass, too. I like my own satires better.

God: And so I said to Noah: "Take seven of every kind of ... "
Moses: Wait a minute. You just said two.
God: Did I?
Moses: Yes, just a moment ago. Look: "Take two of all living creatures ... "
God: Oh, did I? *chuckles*
Moses: What's so funny?
God: It was actually about 300 each. Except for the pigs. I hate pigs.
Moses: But God! There wouldn't have been enough space on the ark!
God: Well, Noah wanted me to warp space and time. That lazy bugger. Bet he wanted the 40 - wait, 150 - whatever amount of days to pass faster.
Moses: And did You?
God: In the end we threw the dinosaurs overboard. And the australopithecines. Filthy naked homs.
Moses: But why did you need 300? Wouldn't two, or seven, be enough?
God: You've never read Lewontin, have you?
Moses: Lewon-who?
God: Never mind. Anyway, you need about that number of animals to preserve enough genetic diversity after a mass extinction event like the global Flood.
Moses: Genetic diversity? What's that?
God: Well, it's like this. Life on Earth carries in them DNA, which -
Moses: Look, first You said it was 2, then You said it was 7, and now You're saying it was 300, for some incomprehensible reason involving some strange substance which none of us have ever seen before. The people are waiting for answers, and if you think the golden calf was bad, wait 'till they finish the rest of the golden menagerie. Now what do You want me to write down?
God: Alright, keep it as it is. Leave it as 2 the first time round and 7 the second time.
Moses: But that's an inconsistency!
God: Who cares? I'm going to leave the infidels with something to laugh at for a few more millenia and have fun watching them.
Moses: But don't You want them to come to the faith? Doesn't your Bible have to be completely accurate to do that?
God: Well, there's a reason it's called "faith", right?



... I've never heard a better creationist explanation for the conflicting numbers in Genesis 6-8.
 
Upvote 0

artybloke

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
5,222
456
66
North of England
✟8,017.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Politics
UK-Labour
I guess I do find it strange that people find it objectionable that the Bible could contain fiction, poetry, allegory, myth, call it what you will. The assumption that somehow if it's fiction, it's a lie, is just weird to me; all art is about truth, or it's not really art, it's just decoration. People tell stories to get to the truth of the world through something other than scientific reasoning, don't they? Isn't that way people write poetry, write symphonies, paint pictures, tell stories?

And Jesus himself was a storyteller; why is it so difficult to imagine the writers of Genesis as storytellers too?

I keep asking this question, and maybe one day I'll get an answer. Even supposing that God "wrote" the Bible, why can't God tell stories, write poetry etc in order to send the truth into peoples' hearts? It seems a much more direct route than to just give a bunch of dry facts.

What is so bad about storytelling that God cannot be a storyteller?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.