Jan de Koning (
Mon, 17 Mar 1997 18:52:21 -0500

Of course, all of us "side" on the side of the bible, which does not mean,
that we always read the bible in a way it was meant to be read. The CRI
wants to make the bible a book full of scientific propositions, which it is
not. It still is a book in which God tells us the story of salvation, in a
way, that the peoples of another, much older culture understood it. That
means that they had another conception of "Truth." In general, we can say
that the biblical conception of "truth" has in it a "troth" value, that is
"to be faithful." If we want to read the Bible as a textbook of geology or
biology we take "truth" to be something "objective," which is impossible.
We are always looking at things from out of our "subjective" concept of
reality. That concept has been ruined by the Fall in sin.

Our subjective concept of "Truth" has been influenced by viewing reality
as a dichotomy of spirit and substance, which then has as a result a
viewing man as body and soul and consequently a splitting of the university
in departments of Arts and Science. Many European universities came back
from this dichotomy, which is still used in English speaking countries,
often causing confusion. These concepts originate in philosophy, and more
particularly in ancient Greek philosophy. The investigations in this area
are unfortunately hardly started, and I am even hesitant to mention it
here, because I know, that the discussion, which is necessary, has to be
done on a biblical, philosophical and historical level. Then it has to be
applied to the natural sciences, like Biology, Geology etc. Unfortunately
most of us are not competent in all those areas, and depend on secondary
sources. That is always dangerous. However, because of the above
circumstances I find many of the ongoing discussions not satisfying.

I hope you understand what I mean when I use the word "substance." I
can't find a word that better expresses my intention, but I don't find it
entirely satisfying either. Add to the above difficulties the fact that
many believe (yet) that the so-called scientific method is a good method (I
don't) then you will realize why I aamvery reluctant to bring up these
matters, though I believe they aare basic to any discussion on these subjects.

Jan de Koning
Willowdale, Ont.