License

I have written an e-book, Does the Bible Really Say That?, which is free to anyone. To download that book, in several formats, go here.
Creative Commons License
The posts in this blog are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. You can copy and use this material, as long as you aren't making money from it. If you give me credit, thanks. If not, OK.
Showing posts with label N. T. Wright. Show all posts
Showing posts with label N. T. Wright. Show all posts

Monday, December 04, 2023

The problem of good

Christians are often asked to defend God, from attacks using the problem of evil: If God is good, and all-powerful, why are there things such as earthquakes, meteors, and Alzheimer's? Why does God allow human-caused evils, like global climate change, child sexual exploitation, and war? These can be serious questions, and hard ones to answer. This area of thought is often called "the problem of evil." C. S. Lewis answered that problem in his The Problem of Pain.

There are, then, problems for Christians. However, there are corresponding problems, much less frequently discussed, for atheists, namely the problem of good. As N. T. Wright put it in his Surprised by Scripture: Engaging Contemporary Issues, if the universe is here because of mindless chance, how is it that there is so much in our surroundings to appreciate and cherish: leaf colors, rainbows, music, innocent laughter, beautiful human constructions, unselfish good deeds, uplifting literature, and much more?

Thanks for reading.

Tuesday, September 05, 2023

Is Genesis straightforward historical narrative? Genesis 1 and 2

The Answers in Genesis Statement of Faith says, in part: “The account of origins presented in Genesis 1–11 is a simple but factual presentation of actual events, and therefore, provides a reliable framework for scientific research into the question of the origin and history of life, mankind, the earth, and the universe.” … and “The days in Genesis do not correspond to geologic ages but are six consecutive, 24-hour days of creation; …”

Two previous posts (genre, and culture) on this blog describe the effect of genre, and of the culture of the writers, and listeners/readers, in ancient times, on what the Bible communicates. Those effects, and other reasons, indicate that Genesis 1-2, in particular, is not simple, and does not necessarily communicate consecutive events. 

Let’s consider the questions of simplicity and of consecutive events.
 
Genesis 1 puts the creation of humans, male and female, on Day 6. If Genesis 2 does, it doesn’t do so simply. Adam comes at the beginning, and Eve at the end, in chapter 2. It is possible to reconcile these accounts on this point, but, to do so, one must depart from a “plain reading of scripture.*” Genesis 1 also puts land plants in day 3, before the creation of humans, whereas Genesis 2 seems to put Adam before the plants. Genesis 1 puts the creation of animals on day 6, whereas Genesis 2 appears to put that creation after the appearance of Adam. Answers in Genesis, and others, believe that Genesis 2:19 should be translated to say that God “had formed” -- already done it -- before presenting the animals to Adam. Perhaps, but only four of the Bible versions given in the Blueletter Bible say that. The other thirteen say “formed,” as if it happened as they were presented to Adam. One of the four that says “had formed” gives “formed" as an alternate reading.

There are many God-fearing, Christ-believing Bible scholars who are convinced that Genesis 1 and 2 were not intended to be step-by-step historical narrative, and/or who do not think that their purpose was to establish the timing of creation. Listen to N. T. Wright, for one.

There are other reasons for doubting that Genesis 1 and 2 were meant to give us a step-by-step historical narrative of the creation. God willing, I shall continue this series.

Answers in Genesis zealously defends the Bible, if the Bible needs any defense, but they propose at least one really strange idea of how to look at the Bible.

*Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis, “Pausing for a Leaven warning,” March 2, 2023, writes “we should always be suspicious when the secular world proclaims anything at odds with a plain reading of Scripture.” That phrase, “plain reading of scripture,” is claimed as the foundation of Answers in Genesis, the most influential young-earth entity.

Wednesday, July 15, 2020

Sunspots 789


Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:


Christianity: Relevant interviews N. T. Wright about the pandemic.

The US, under the Trump administration, is admitting far fewer persecuted Christians from other countries than it has for the last 40 years, according to Christianity Today.

Environment: California condors are making a comeback, thanks to efforts to save them, according to Gizmodo.

Science: The Scientist reports that innovative species of birds are more likely to prosper. The article mentions some amazing examples of bird innovation.

The Scientist also tells us that social isolation can have a detrimental effect on the brain.

Gizmodo reports on studies of Andean condors, which can soar, without flapping their wings, for as much as 100 miles.


The graphic used in these posts is from NASA, hence, it is free to use like this.

Thanks for looking!

Saturday, June 13, 2020

The Lost World of Genesis One, by John Walton

I recently read John Walton’s The Lost World of Genesis One, which, judging by things I had read about it, is an important book. It lived up to what I had heard.

What lost world is Walton discussing? It is the worldview of Ancient Near East (ANE) culture, the culture of the human author of Genesis, and of those who heard and read that book. Walton believes that we, living in the 21st century, have our own worldview, and that we often do not understand that another one is possible, or, in the case of ANE people, that a different worldview is to be expected, let alone understood.

Walton does not believe that we, of the 21st century, mean the same thing about God’s creation, in the first chapter of Genesis, as the people of the ANE meant and understood. His book summarizes what Walton believes is a major consequence of our worldview, so different from that of the human writer(s?) of Genesis one. Walton states that “I firmly believe that God is fully responsible for material origins.” But, he says,

Most interpreters have generally thought that Genesis 1 contains an account of material origins because that was the only sort of origins that our material culture was interested in. It wasn’t that scholars examined all the possible levels at which origins could be discussed; they presupposed the material aspect.

and All of this indicates that cosmic creation in the ancient world was not viewed primarily as a process by which matter was brought into being, but as a process by which functions, roles, order, jurisdiction, organization and stability were established.

As an example, Walton uses the sun and moon. ANE culture didn't understand that the sun and the moon were large bodies beyond our atmosphere, nor that the moon was in orbit around the earth, and the earth was in orbit around the sun. The ANE understanding of Genesis 1:14-18 would have resembled someone painting, or installing, these lights on the the firmament. Walton sees that passage as about function, not about creating from nothing, and notes that Genesis 1 indicates the functions of what we now think of as heavenly bodies:

Genesis 1:17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light to the earth, 18a and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. (World English Bible, public domain)

By the way, ANE culture believed that the clouds and the heavenly bodies were held up, and in place, by a transparent sphere, a ceiling, the firmament. There isn't a firmament. Does that mean that the Bible is in error? Not so. The Bible is inerrant, but inerrant in what it affirms, not in what it reports or adjusts to in the culture of the time it was written. It doesn’t affirm ANE concepts of astronomy, nor, for that matter, 21st century concepts of astronomy. It just reports them, or uses them. Walton points out that we usually talk and write as if the sky really was blue, (It is often red or pink near dawn and sunset. For the reasons for that, see this Scientific American article.) and as if the sun really rose and set. Neither is really true, but, if some portion of the Bible were to be written today, and made reference to these phenomena, it would not be in error, unless blue sky and a rising sun were an integral part of the message of the gospel.

There are other ANE concepts that we no longer hold, such as that the earth is flat, with four corners.

To Walton, Genesis 1 was not meant, by God, to be taken as sequential history, setting forth a literal description of God’s acts in making things. Rather, it was meant to contradict other creation stories, about false gods, and to describe God’s work in making a functioning, harmonious earth, with its inhabitants.

Walton discusses the first three days, so-called, from Genesis 1, and concludes that they, as described, were meant to credit God for creating time, weather, and food, in that order.

Even humans, says Walton, were mentioned not principally as something made, but as something with functions in God's creation:
Genesis 1:26b “... Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the sky, and over the livestock, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 God created man in his own image. In God’s image he created him; male and female he created them. 28 God blessed them. God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

He also writes that “Of the seven days, three have no statement of creation of any material component (days 1, 3 and 7).”

Beside his interpretation of Genesis 1 as describing function, not making, Walton has another important idea, namely that Genesis 1 should be interpreted as God preparing a temple for himself, and, on the seventh day, inhabiting it. Besides his interpretation of what the original Bible language says, Walton has also looked at lots of ancient writings by non-Hebrew ANE authors, and that, too, has influenced his view of what he calls temple inauguration. Walton explicitly denies that Genesis is based on these other writings.

It so happens that I was reading a book by N. T. Wright, an important bible scholar, as part of my devotional reading, while I was writing this. I was surprised to read the following:
When God made the world, he “rested” on the seventh day. This doesn’t just mean that God took a day off. It means that in the previous six days God was making a world—heaven and earth together—for his own use. Like someone building a home, God finished the job and then went in to take up residence, to enjoy what he had built. Creation was itself a temple, the Temple, the heaven-and-earth structure built for God to live in. - N. T. Wright, Simply Jesus: A New Vision of Who He Was, What He Did, and Why He Matters

Now, finally, about the age of the earth. Says Walton: If the seven days refer to the seven days of cosmic temple inauguration, days that concern origins of functions not material, then the seven days and Genesis 1 as a whole have nothing to contribute to the discussion of the age of the earth.

and “The point is not that the biblical text therefore supports an old earth, but simply that there is no biblical position on the age of the earth.”

Walton does not claim that he wrote as he did with a view to contradicting Young-Earth Creationism, but, as he says, it is clear that this important Bible scholar is not wedded to YEC.

Thanks for reading!

This graphic below (not from Walton) indicates that it is impossible to read both Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 as if they were simple narratives, expressing events in sequence as they happened:





Wednesday, January 01, 2020

Sunspots 761


Things I have recently spotted that may be of interest to someone else:


Christianity: (or something) NPR reports on how a couple who moved into a neighborhood recently had a deaf child, and the neighbors, who had all lived there a long time, have decided to learn sign language.

N. T. Wright on how most Christians have the wrong idea about heaven.

Christianity Today, and other outlets, report that a Chinese pastor has been sentenced to 9 years in prison.

Computing: Gizmodo reports on what people wanted most to know in the Wikipedia.

Gizmodo also reports that anti-robocalling legislation has been approved by Congress, and signed by President Trump. Gizmodo also guesses that it will help some, but maybe not enough.


Education: CBS News reports that Princeton University has honored lunchroom, and other non-professorial workers, by hanging their portraits.


Environment: A Relevant article on why Christians should care for the environment.

Health: A woman with sickle-cell anemia has been treated with her own cells, modified with CRISPR. The results are promising.
 
Politics: Relevant reports that white evangelicals are further from the mainstream in their attitudes concerning immigration than they are on abortion.

The graphic used in these posts is from NASA, hence, it is free to use like this.

Thanks for looking!