Friday, August 7, 2009
Gary A Kent Photography Website
Take a look at my photography website at www.lonetree-pictures.net for snippets of my philosophy along with some terrific photos.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Literally Literal
There is no such thing as the literal truth of the Bible. Even the word "literal" itself is subject to interpretation. Do you mean it in the dictionary definition sense or in the legal sense?
All language is metaphor. We are taught in grammar school that "the word is not the thing." Yet, when we apply words in a sentence, we use the words as if they were "the things". If we apply words according to their definitions, we tell a little story about it. The definition is itself a restatement of the word in terms of more words which themselves have definitions. Ultimately, we tell stories about our words that are so far from the actual truth or experience of them that they cannot be regarded as other than metaphor.
The Bible was revealed by God to its authors in such a way that it would be understandable to illiterate ancient peoples. Most of the Bible was handed down from generation to generation in the form of the spoken word or in song. Even after it was finally written down it was subject to alteration, for it was copied dozens of times. Undoubtedly the scribes made errors. No human is perfect.
Then there is the problem of language. We do not have the original texts of the Bible, for the most part. Even if we did, we would have to read them as translations. Actually, we read translations of translations of translations. These are interpretations or substitutions of one metaphor for another in the hope that the basic meaning still will get through.
God chose His words carefully so that ancient listeners and readers would understand and not be confused. He knew that we, as modern literate readers with the benefit of greater knowledge and understanding, could approach the Bible's choice of phrases and wording with the sophistication of informed readers. We are informed by our knowledge of different cultures, of the intricacies of language and by science. God trusts us to be able to use our brains to see past the simplifications and, yes, sometimes the oversimplifications, of biblical accounts.
The sequence of events in, say, Genesis, are laid out in artistic format that would not confuse the ancient listener or reader. The timelines are logical to the illiterate mind but may make little sense to us "moderns" if taken literally in the light of our more advanced knowledge. And, just because events may be listed in a certain order does not necessarily imply that the Bible insists that they actually occurred in that order. It just makes for more orderly prose that might be better understood by the uneducated mind.
God wants us to use our brains and our knowledge to interpret the Bible. Why else would He have given us such big heads? So, the Bible story of creation, for instance, is a skeletal, simplified, perhaps oversimplified account of how things came to be. With the knowledge which God's gift of science to us provides, we can flesh out the skeleton and build an account that is closer to the "literal" truth.
With this in mind, we can see that the Bible's timeline is strongly condensed in Genesis, the presentation of the sequence of events is tailored for illiterate farmers and nomads and much is left out. With our knowing this, God trusts us to see His real purpose and perceive His true Word.
This means that the signs and signals of science can be reconciled with the biblical account of, say, creation in Genesis, for example. And for literary purposes it is not necessary to insist on technical accuracy anyway. The bottom line is whether God manages to get His ideas across.
My bottom line is that there need not be any contradiction between the commonly accepted truths of science, including natural selection, astronomy, cosmology or geophysics and Genesis or any other part of the Bible. God made us Responsible. This means that He charges us with the task of using our boney heads.
He did not evolve for us our big brains for nothing.
All language is metaphor. We are taught in grammar school that "the word is not the thing." Yet, when we apply words in a sentence, we use the words as if they were "the things". If we apply words according to their definitions, we tell a little story about it. The definition is itself a restatement of the word in terms of more words which themselves have definitions. Ultimately, we tell stories about our words that are so far from the actual truth or experience of them that they cannot be regarded as other than metaphor.
The Bible was revealed by God to its authors in such a way that it would be understandable to illiterate ancient peoples. Most of the Bible was handed down from generation to generation in the form of the spoken word or in song. Even after it was finally written down it was subject to alteration, for it was copied dozens of times. Undoubtedly the scribes made errors. No human is perfect.
Then there is the problem of language. We do not have the original texts of the Bible, for the most part. Even if we did, we would have to read them as translations. Actually, we read translations of translations of translations. These are interpretations or substitutions of one metaphor for another in the hope that the basic meaning still will get through.
God chose His words carefully so that ancient listeners and readers would understand and not be confused. He knew that we, as modern literate readers with the benefit of greater knowledge and understanding, could approach the Bible's choice of phrases and wording with the sophistication of informed readers. We are informed by our knowledge of different cultures, of the intricacies of language and by science. God trusts us to be able to use our brains to see past the simplifications and, yes, sometimes the oversimplifications, of biblical accounts.
The sequence of events in, say, Genesis, are laid out in artistic format that would not confuse the ancient listener or reader. The timelines are logical to the illiterate mind but may make little sense to us "moderns" if taken literally in the light of our more advanced knowledge. And, just because events may be listed in a certain order does not necessarily imply that the Bible insists that they actually occurred in that order. It just makes for more orderly prose that might be better understood by the uneducated mind.
God wants us to use our brains and our knowledge to interpret the Bible. Why else would He have given us such big heads? So, the Bible story of creation, for instance, is a skeletal, simplified, perhaps oversimplified account of how things came to be. With the knowledge which God's gift of science to us provides, we can flesh out the skeleton and build an account that is closer to the "literal" truth.
With this in mind, we can see that the Bible's timeline is strongly condensed in Genesis, the presentation of the sequence of events is tailored for illiterate farmers and nomads and much is left out. With our knowing this, God trusts us to see His real purpose and perceive His true Word.
This means that the signs and signals of science can be reconciled with the biblical account of, say, creation in Genesis, for example. And for literary purposes it is not necessary to insist on technical accuracy anyway. The bottom line is whether God manages to get His ideas across.
My bottom line is that there need not be any contradiction between the commonly accepted truths of science, including natural selection, astronomy, cosmology or geophysics and Genesis or any other part of the Bible. God made us Responsible. This means that He charges us with the task of using our boney heads.
He did not evolve for us our big brains for nothing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
