Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!bcm!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: dhosek@sif.claremont.edu (Hosek, Donald A.) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Bible the word of God? Message-ID: Date: 9 Nov 90 05:34:00 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Quixote Lines: 51 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article , crf@tomato.princeton.edu (Charles Ferenbaugh) writes... >I'm no expert, but I've heard that when Bible scholars talk about inerrancy >their definitions are not the outrageous ones above. Apparently they have >no problems with saying yes, the Bible was written by men (men inspired by >God, but still men); yes, the Bible is subject to the same sorts of textual >corruption as any other book; and yes, we still have to put work into >understanding the cultural background, figurative language, ... before >we can have any hope of fully understanding what the Bible is saying. >(Let me emphasize that this refers to what _scholars_ say; some of these >subtleties tend to get lost before they find their way out to the >average Christian-in-the-street.) None of these things affects the >Main Issue. >As I see it, the Main Issue boils down to this: >Premise A: The Bible is, somehow, inspired by God. >Premise B: God does not lie. >---------------------- >Conclusion: *If* (and yes, this is a BIG if) we could completely understand > what God is trying to say to us through the Bible, we would > find it all to be true. Exactly. Last week, I finally understood Biblical fundamentalism and why people are willing to accept the idea of the literal truth of every word in the Bible (i.e., the obvious meaning of some phrase, e.g., the world was created in seven days, etc., is the only correct interpretation). And that's because it's difficult to view the bible as a teaching story. A favorite quote of mine from Umberto Eco (from _Name of the Rose_) is in order here: Books are made not to be believed, but to be subjected to inquiry. When we consider a book, we musn't ask ourselves what it says, but what it means. The important thing about Genesis, chapter one is not how God created the world or how much time He spent on it, but rather the fact that God created the world. I won't argue the issue of creationism because it doesn't matter whether the universe was created in a week or ten zillion years. All that matters is that it's God's work. And this sort of understanding does not come easily. Nor does the necessary inquiry. Take for example the creation of Eve in Genesis 2. That nasty phrase, about her being a helpmeet to the man. How many of you know that the word for help there is the same Hebrew word used elsewhere to describe God's relationship to humanity? Interesting insight isn't it? -dh "You can study Greek on your own time, but we prefer the original King James version around here." (I _like_ that one).