From: Jan de Koning <jan@dekoning.ca>
> I have said and say it again, Allan, this subject has been talked about in
> many different forms, and different words. The fact is no matter how you
> talk about it, basically you want (I think), read the Bible as a
> text-book. Even if it is only to know how God created. The Bible is
meant
> for all times and all people. If you want to read the Bible in a
different
> way than I do, it is your right, but I say again, the Bible is not that
> kind of a book. Nor does it want to tell exactly HOW things
> happened. That is why I come back time and again and say, that it takes
> years to talk about this subject. Gen.chapters 1 - 11 are not even a
> listing of what modern North Americans call facts. God does not use our
> language to people living 6000 years and more ago in the same way as he
> talks to people who know a little more now. That is why I repeat again:
> modern American philosophies do not understand old historic facts, and
> especially they do not understand the languages used. So needed is study
> of Theology (thoroughly), Christian Philosophy and not just the
superficial
> kind, but preferably the Philosophy of the Law Idea, because Vollenhoven
> stayed very close to the Bible in his lectures, and his criticizing of old
> and new philosophies, knowledge of languages, knowledge of history of
> science, and the realization that languages continually change. "Truth"
> used to mean faithfullness as is still visible in "troth."
>
> Since "scientific" has a specific meaning nowadays, which was totally
> unknown even a few centuries ago, it is clear that the Bible is not
written
> in "scientific" language. God used in the Bible spoken to people 6000
> years ago a language they could understand. We should realize that we do
> have to study a lot before we can say: "The Bible says this or that".
>
> The Holy Spirit will guide us in reading the Bible, if we are willing to
> spend many, many years of studying the situations about which the Bible
> talks to people at a certain time.
I think we can agree that the same Holy Spirit who inspired the ancient
writers has been given the task of leading us into "all truth" (as I
believe it says) if we will let Him. And I agree that the theme of
salvation in the Bible is so deep that one can spend a life time exploring
the depths of the Bible. However, it is also simple enough that even
children can know the basic concepts. However, length of time studing the
Bible does not guarantee better knowledge of the Bible. A scholar who may
spend a lifetime studying the Bible, but who is not a believer, will never
truly understand the Bible for, as God says, it is foolishness to the
unbeliever (sic). I disagree that it take years to understand. If we are
lead by the Holy Spirit in our study it does not take years of study before
we can say "the Bible says this or that."
I find your statment "Gen.chapters 1 - 11 are not even a listing of what
modern North Americans call facts." so far from reality that one has to
wonder if we are looking at the same thing. Sure there were and are
differences in language, culture and thinking between then and now (and even
between concurent cultures today) but not THAT much difference. Most anyone
can understand that basic differences and be able to determine the guiding
principles that exist regardless of cultural and linguistic differences.
The Bible is not some mystical mumbo-jumbo. It was written in plain
language for plain people. It is not the exclusive realm of long haired,
gray bearded old scholars or clergy who deign to instruct the ignorant on
what the Bible "really" says.
And I find this statement: "God does not use our language to people living
6000 years and more ago in the same way as he talks to people who know a
little more now," extremely arrogent. Can you confidently say that we
really know more now than they did about the world around them?! A huge
fallacy that has been expressed on this net is that the writers of the Bible
MUST have had the same views of the world as their pagan neighbors. If you
follow through with this thinking then they Bible writers MUST have had the
same religious views as their pagan neighbors. After all God told Abraham
offer human scrifice. Right? If we claim differences in religious
practices (which is most important) then we need not claim sameness of views
on other less important matters.
Again, hear I am sucked into a discussion I don't have time for. I must
stand down and go back into lurking mode.
Allen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 15 2002 - 00:59:02 EST