Re: Orthodoxy (was Re: Biblical Interpretation Reconsidered)

On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 18:11:32 -0800 (PST) "Dr. Blake Nelson"
<bnelson301@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> (SNIP)
>
> I'm with Bruno LaTour (and I am sure many others -- I
> suspect including Bob) at least as far as saying such
> questions are category mistakes. If one asks where
> does the "Y" chromosome come from, how exactly did
> Mary conceive in biological terms, what gender was the
> angel Gabriel, etc. you are asking the wrong questions
> about the narratives for several reasons. Even
> assuming that it is literally true in the way a modern
> would conceive of it, why do the mechanisms of how
> Mary became pregnant or the formation of Jesus' Y
> chromosome matter? If they don't, why do we ask the
> questions about them as if they do? IMHO, they only
> matter to the extent one wants to ask different
> questions than the narrative is addressing and that
> seems to me a fundamental error in addressing the text
> that entirely misses its point.
>
> (SNIP)
>
Sorry to be slow here. I have some observations, which I hope are not too
cryptic.

First, there is a difference between "I don't need an answer" and "No one
needs to consider the matter." Further, there is a radical difference
between "The authors of Scripture do not supply an answer because they
did not ask (or record) the question" and "There is no possible
answer"--which is what "category mistake" involves. Also, "There is no
definitive or absolute answer" is not equivalent to "There is no answer."

Where Jesus' Y chromosome (or whatever may substitute for it) came from
is relevant. If it came from Mary's fornication, then Jesus was a
normally begotten human being, innately endowed with all the rights of
his fellows. If God then took him over, the deity is acting as demons do.
This is not moral. Only if Jesus unconditionally owes his existence to a
direct divine act may we have the hypostatic union morally (and, I would
think, metaphysically). As to the "mechanism" by which this took place,
there are only partial answers to any miracle, and an implicit IMO. But
then we have only partial answers and alternatate possibilities to many
strictly scientific questions.

It is no crime to be curious, to seek answers beyond those asked by our
predecessors of any period. While there are various answers given for may
questions relating to Jesus, one needs to give a strightforward
explanation to some, as for his claim to be one with the Father (John
10:30; cf. 15:7). False record and insane claim bear on our salvation,
and mesh with matters of chromosomal endowment.
Dave
Received on Fri Dec 26 14:04:10 2003