Glenn Morton wrote:
<<
Then I see no reason to believe that Abraham is any different--he is a
reflection of the divine/human relationship, as is David. One can play this
game until we have nothing left of reality and we are then left with a God
who inspired a book that got NOTHING correct!
>>
I don't know about the Hebrew text, but it does look a bit different
in style between the two parts. The only thing that leaves me
a bit divided on this issue is the presence of geneologies listed
in the first 11 books of Genesis. If they only appeared in
reference to Abraham, it would be quite easy to dismiss the first
11 books as "101 Answers When Your Ten Year-old Starts Asking
Questions" manual. Unfortunately, the Bible is not clear on
how we are supposed to use those first 11 books.
Obviously, if Abraham is merely a "good story", and the Exodus
is "a book to inspire Hebrew nationalism", it is clear what I
would have to say. The message of Exodus is that God demands
accountability and that there is meaning and purpose in history.
If it's all a made up story, what reason would I have to believe
that God is any more than an otiose deity (if that).
and a little later....
<<
The problem is in the nature of inspiration. If God's inspiration makes no
difference in what the Hebrews wrote compared with the writings of other
ancient cultures, of what value is the Hebrew writings? In that case, I
would see little to recommend a belief in the Bible.
>>
In a very different context, this reminds me of John 6:60-70.
Many of Jesus' followers give up complaining that the teaching
was "too hard", finally the twelve are left, and Jesus asks them
"You do not want to leave too, do you?" whereupon
Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? ...."
I know the exegesis for this passage is quite different. For
one thing, it was a response to the Truth, not a response
to what might be a made up story.
It may be the same way from the atheists' side, but I always
find it hard to understand why it is not "obvious" that there
*is* a God. It just seems like the natural order of things.
It is possible that life is mere probabilities, frivolous chance,
and in the flicker of a moment, lost into the vast oblivion of
cosmic nothingness. A "tale told by an idiot with sound and
flurry signifying nothing". No accountability. I can bump off
all my enemies if I have the opportunity and have a good plan.
If I have enough power, I can just take what I want. Why not
simply have it all? Just learn some game theory, and
life is set... and when it's gone, what use is it anyway?
Not so if there is this God of the Bible.
Obviously, there needs to be historicity for the Bible to
have a claim on my life, but how much? If it
were 90 % reliable, is that enough to cut it some slack for
the other 10 %? I don't know exactly where my line in the
sand is, it would probably depend on *what* was unreliable.
But somehow, in all of this, I feel much like Simon Peter,
"Lord to whom would we go?". Likewise much like Jeremiah:
"Why is my pain unending and my wound grievous and incurable?
Will you be to me like a deceptive brook, like a spring that fails?"
Jr. 15:18.
by Grace alone do we proceed,
Wayne
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 03 2001 - 09:14:45 EST