From: Jan de Koning (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Dec 09 2002 - 20:36:19 EST
At 06:52 PM 09/12/2002 +0000, Jim Eisele wrote:
>My point was that you can't take the words at face value. We all
>(except the in-denial YECs) accept that. To me, the next logical
>question is "what about the New Testament?" Are these more historically
>inaccurate "stories" to "make a theological point?" Did Jesus raise from
>the dead "in a spiritual sense?" If we can destroy the meaning of words
>in the OT, it is only intellectually honest to challenge the NT as well.
>Genesis in Question
"face value" is a modern expression. I still believe that we have to be
careful with expressions like that. There is a great difference between
Gen.1-11 written in ancient Hebrew to get the introduction to the books of
Moses, following a tradition of discussing in ancient Palestine, and the
telling of Jesus'life and the actions of the young church written in a more
modern language which we know from secular writings as well. Though even
there you have to watch that you do not read modern meanings in certain
Also, certain words in the OT are translated differently into English
depending on the way the translators think. For example "ruach" in the OT
and "pneuma" in the NT, resulting in different translations.
Or, "nephesh" and its derivations. For example: in Gen.1 for animals
translated as "living being" and in Gen.2 for men as "soul" in some
translations. (In the NIV in both places "living being"). Sentences have
to be made understandable in our modern times with the danger that in many
cases our modern understanding is hampering a proper translation.
BTW I am somewhat hesitant about mentioning these things, since it can
easily develop in a long, unending discussion. It is more a subject for a
full course than for a conversation, even when both sides are thoroughly
versed in the subject. The only reason I react is, because I find the
expression "historically inaccurate" dangerous and objectionable when we
talk about the Bible. I believe that the Bible is "true", but that we come
to it with a lot of insights we want to use in explaining things we do not
understand. I believe that the Bible is clear in the NT about the
necessity that our Lord Jesus had to die to make (eternal)life for us
possible. I believe as well that at that time and even now "miracles"
happen, though I am sceptical when they are widely advertized.
Jan de Koning
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Dec 10 2002 - 01:03:37 EST