What does Genesis One literally say?

[Paul of Eugene]

Prov 25:2
2 It is the glory of God to conceal a matter,
But the glory of kings is to search out a matter.
NKJV

Dan 12:4
4 "But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase."
NKJV

 

[A_Christian]

Knowledge and wisdom ain't the same thing.
Many scientist have knowledge but they lack
wisdom. Wisdom comes from GOD.

 

[aefting]

Suppose you teach a SS lesson or preach a sermon that God uses to touch someone's life. I trust that has happened, else why do you do these things? Do you feel you were granted inerrancy in that lesson or sermon? Would you accuse God of lieing to the listners should there be a minor error somewhere in your lesson?

God never lies. It is the human part of the equation that is reponsible for any errors.

I don't claim inerrancy when I teach; however, I do try to get the message across as accurately as possible so that my students do get the inerrant teaching of Scripture. If I'm off in the interpretation or don't communicate properly, then they are not getting what they deserve. I take this responsibility very seriously.

In making the comment above about apparant age, we have to consider the apparant age of the stars as well. This includes starlight that shows stars exploding and dying in the distant past. God, then, would be seen as showing us a star that never really existed (it's gone now) and a "story" about that star being really there was played out before our eyes.

God never lies. He wouldn't do that. Those ancient stars were real.

This response may not satisfy you but I took that into account in my previous reply. Personally, I think it's wonderful that God gave scientists data to study concerning exploding and dying stars, etc.

Andy

 

[Meatros]

Originally posted by A_Christian:
Knowledge and wisdom ain't the same thing.
Many scientist have knowledge but they lack
wisdom. Wisdom comes from GOD.

What is this, a haiku?

 

[Paul of Eugene]

Thanks, Andy, for continuing to reply.

Originally posted by aefting:
I don't claim inerrancy when I teach; however, I do try to get the message across as accurately as possible so that my students do get the inerrant teaching of Scripture. If I'm off in the interpretation or don't communicate properly, then they are not getting what they deserve. I take this responsibility very seriously.

This is the way we all are when we teach. This is good! Now - consider the biblical writers.

Among these two possibilities:
a) Like you they did what they could, taking seriously their task, transmitting what God had given them to the best of their ability, but with the same possibility of error you and I have when we do these things

b) They were granted supernatural absense of error.

Betwee these two possibilities, what objective test could we perform to tell if one or the other were the case?

Well, we can look to see if minor errors come across, of course.

But if whenever we have the possibility of seeing a minor error, we choose to reinterpret the situtation to remove all possibility of error - citing redefinition of words, assuming idiomatic usage, redefinition of history, redefinition of reality, possible errors of transcription in the past, whatever . . .

how can we ever know if we are or are not in fact merely artificially forcing ourselves to believe proposition b instead of a?

 

[aefting]

a) Like you they did what they could, taking seriously their task, transmitting what God had given them to the best of their ability, but with the same possibility of error you and I have when we do these things

b) They were granted supernatural absense of error.

Betwee these two possibilities, what objective test could we perform to tell if one or the other were the case?

Other than accepting the Bible's testimony concerning itself, I don't think there are objective tests to prove (b). For one thing, it would be impossible to validate every statement in the Bible -- either we don't have enough information or it's a prophecy that is yet to be fulfilled.

Well, we can look to see if minor errors come across, of course.

But if whenever we have the possibility of seeing a minor error, we choose to reinterpret the situtation to remove all possibility of error - citing redefinition of words, assuming idiomatic usage, redefinition of history, redefinition of reality, possible errors of transcription in the past, whatever . . .

Yes, we could look for counter examples to disprove case (b). I would not use your terminoloy, however, to describe the attempts made by innerrancy advocates to resolve the so-called errors in the Bible. Although, B.B. Warfield suggests that it is sometimes not helpful to try to resolve all the difficulties because sometimes those attempts appear more ridiculous than the so-called error itself. I think he has a point to some extent.

My view is this -- if we knew everything, not only would the difficulties go away, but we would be forced to admit that the Biblical statement in question was the only real way (or at least the best way) to effectively communicate the truth of the matter.

how can we ever know if we are or are not in fact merely artificially forcing ourselves to believe proposition b instead of a?

I think it comes down to this:

Hebrews 11:1-3
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 For by it the people of old received their commendation. 3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible. (ESV)



Andy

 

[Paul of Eugene]

I dreamed and in my dream I went to heaven to ask some questions.

I showed up at the gate and mentioned my quest to the gatekeeper. "Sure,", he said, "we have a room over here for consultation, orientation, that sort of thing, come over here and I'll get some people to talk to you."

The heavenly representatives slowly filled the room. When all were there, I made my petition. "Back there on earth," I said, "there are people who disbelieve in evolution. Nor do they accept the obvious scientific findings about the age of the earth. They need a sign from heaven that these findings of science are affirmed by heaven itself. Please help me."

They looked at each other, shrugged their shoulders. One of them - was it really Einstein? came up to me and said "Son, there are many petitions coming to us all the time. There are a great many petitions asking for a sign just the opposite, that evolution is false. There are many asking for a sign that their church is better than the mosque next door - and vice-versa. There are signs being requested everywhere there are conflicts that engage men's hearts, with both sides begging for vindication from heaven. However worthy your request" - Did I see him slightly rolling his eyes? - "it is not considered weighty enough to bring forth to the sign level."

But I persisted. "Look," I said, "people are actually under the impression that to accept science is to undermine their faith in God! Can't we give them some kind of sign?"

The group withdrew. Then the spokesman came forth again - was it Newton, perhaps? Or even Galleleo? I couldn't quite tell . .

"We have agreed among us that we will give you a bit of information. The use you make of it is up to you. Here it is." He handed me a sealed envelope. "Don't open it until you are back home again."

I departed heaven and tho still in my dream it seemed I was now in my own home, at my kitchen table. I opened the envelope and this is what I read:

If they do not believe Einstein, Hubble, Hawking, Shapely, Gamow, Kant, Herschel, Lowell, Leavitt, Dirac, Seyfert, Baade, Hoyle, Oort, Dyson, Drake, Kirkwood, Darwin, Sagan, Penrose, Leaky, Gould, and myriads of other seekers after truth, they will not believe should they even receive a sign from heaven.

 

[aefting]

If they do not believe Einstein, Hubble, Hawking, Shapely, Gamow, Kant, Herschel, Lowell, Leavitt, Dirac, Seyfert, Baade, Hoyle, Oort, Dyson, Drake, Kirkwood, Darwin, Sagan, Penrose, Leaky, Gould, and myriads of other seekers after truth, they will not believe should they even receive a sign from heaven.

I think you got the wrong envelope. Mine said, "Moses and the prophets."

 

[Paul of Eugene]

I looked on the other side of the paper and that's what it says there too!