At 09:05 PM 21/03/02 +0000, Jim Eisele wrote:
>Don Perrett writes
> >I have said that science should not contradict the Bible.
>Very deep, Don. The YECs realize this. The OECs realize
>this. The PNs realize this. Atheists take this position.
>Alas, only the liberals ;-) remain.
Pardon my ignorance what does PN mean? I think I figured out what YEC
and OEC means, though I know of more than one way of being YEC and OEC.
What bothers me most in this continuing discussion is that it does not get
anyone anywhere, it takes up place, and pretty soon I delete right away
when I see particular names.
And, also, the way the Bible is treated by most sides I personally find
less than respectful.
Does anyone who studied biology, physics, and even anthropology really
believe, that the Lord wrote Genesis chapters 1 through 11 in a way which
confuses people then and now.? Now by contradicting it with putting clues
in nature which would contradict Genesis, and in the old time by using 21st
In order not to be misunderstood, I believe, that Genesis 1 - 11 was
written to people living 4000 to 6000 yeras ago in words they would
understand. They did nor now anything about "evolution", nor about dating
things found around them, etc. Believers only knew, that God was in
charge, and that God wanted to be served. Many did not want to and
followed their own ways, just like many do now. God punished, and the
people living after a punishment wrote down under God's guidance a "piece
of literature" (just like the Psalms for example) to glorify God. Since
before that time nothing was written down, they could not write more than
they did under God's guidance to make sure that a new generation knew that
God was and is in charge.
To assume, that God told people of that time about evolution, about floods
etc. makes from the Bible a book that is not written to bring us to God,
but a book to satisfy our modern curiosity. It is not. God gave us His
book to study it, and to see how all was coming from Him, and He told that
to people 6000 years ago in a language they understood, with examples they
understood. I am reminded of the stories Jesus told. We call them
parables. Nobody in his right mind will say that Jesus was not telling the
truth. Why did He do it that way? To be understood by the people of His
time. Similarly, God wrote a poem in Gen.1, followed by another story in
Gen.2 and following, to show who made everything, followed by a story who
made a mess out of it.
It seems that every few months ago I state my way of reading Gen.1
-11. Many others on this forum did the same and read the Bible in Genesis
more or less like I do, but talking about it like it is being done the last
few weeks does not get anyone anywhere. If one wants to get somewhere one
must study old Hebrew, old History, read many commentaries, sometimes
study other old languages etc. Thoroughly read the articles and papers of
people you dis agree with and study (maybe) Theology etc.
All of the readers on this forum are scientists, I assume, so they can
study, and do not have to talk in one sentence postings to each
other. It reminds me of a friend I had some 55 years ago, who said:
"Jan, you and I have brains, and know how to study. We should read the
Bible in the original Greek and Hebrew." We did . He was much better in
it than I. He became a medical doctor, and we had wonderful discussions,
both of us listening to God's Word in the Bible and in the world around us.
Both of us believe still, that the Bible is the Word of God, but both of us
have trouble with listening to the type of discussion that is going on
about Gen.1 now. Gen.1 is part of a much bigger book.
Jan de Koning
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 21 2002 - 22:16:29 EST