Why Christians are weird
My wife and I had a long conversation over dinner with a business acquaintance who, as it turns out, is a Buddhist. We discussed various philosophical and scientific subjects and also branched out into history and comparative religion. The dinner stretched out for hours.
At the end of the evening, my friend said this: "You two are the most intelligent Bible literalists I have met." I guess that is kind of like saying you don't sweat much for a fat girl. But he and I are friends and I know he meant it as a compliment and we took it as such. But you see, non-Christians think of Bible literalists as ignorant and brain-washed.
It has happened many times, that people have asked me how I can take some of the stands I do. Because I don't seem like a hayseed or an imbecile, they have a hard time understanding how I can believe the Bible is true. It carries over into the discussions on this blog. My last post, for instance, presented some historical evidence for the existence of man and dinosaur at the same time. The response has been general ridicule and/or wonderment that I could actually believe such things.
I have to say that from my point of view, the responses to my posts on this particular subject have been pretty weak. The literary assertions are old news and seem to me like a very lame attempt to dismiss hundreds of years of historical documentation. The references to Behemoth and Leviathan are from people who are not terribly familiar with the subject. In that particular case I didn't expect a lot since the people who are commenting for the most part don't believe the Bible is a valid source anyway and their heart may not be in it. But really, make fun if you will be all of those historical reports will remain and isn't it kind of whistling past the graveyard when all you can do is make fun because there is no other way?
How can someone be weird enough to believe that the Bible is true?
As a Christian, I have to say that for me it is intellectually dishonest for me to depend on one part of the book and dismiss other sections. I know quite well that some of the Bible is prophetic and some is allegorical. I know which parts those are. I know some of it is historical narrative. I recognize the allegorical for what it is and depend on the historical for being accurate. Bible scholars know how to differentiate between allegory and history based on various traits of the text - author, subject, audience, tone, language, time of writing - and have understood this for many centuries. The Bible is accurate in the original language. One has to keep an eye on translations to be sure one is following the text correctly. God didn't inspire the King James Bible even if the effort to compile it was remarkable. The New International Version is not a new Word from on high, just an attempt to translate the meaning in a more modern-friendly form.
The Bible asserts that it is the Word of God, that it was all inspired, that is that God inspired the individual men to write the words on parchment and whatever else they had at hand. It states that all of the scripture is profitable for correction and for doctrine and for learning. If you know the whole Bible, and it fits together quite nicely, then you have to compromise in some way to not accept it at face value if you are indeed a Christian.
I believe a God capable of creating all material things including the forces and time itself is quite capable of giving us a communication from Him for us to study. It is a matter of faith. This is faith, and either you have it or you don't.
Some who come here have faith in science that may be as deep and abiding as my faith in God. I respect the knowledge of many of you, even when I completely disagree. There are intelligent and dedicated people who comment here and I do appreciate them. To some extent they cannot understand my positions but then again we don't usually go there. Of course there are also Christians who comment who do agree with me and will also email me now and again and I do appreciate that.
To make it clear, that my position is (and seems unshakable) that the Bible is reliable as the Word of God and that we will find that the sum of the evidence we find in the fossil records and in organisms and also in outer space and the study of physics that eventually the position I take, now largely unpopular, will become the accepted position. I am not just saying I believe because I believe. I am saying the facts, to me, better represent my beliefs. It is a well reasoned position to take, based on the evidence I see and the world view I have.
Tomorrow, I will present a challenge to those on the other side of the fence. I am giving some specific examples of evidences of man and dinosaur together and will make it easy for you to refute or agree with them. At least, it is my hope that I can present these evidences in such a way that you will be able to address them clearly and individually.
"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."
At the end of the evening, my friend said this: "You two are the most intelligent Bible literalists I have met." I guess that is kind of like saying you don't sweat much for a fat girl. But he and I are friends and I know he meant it as a compliment and we took it as such. But you see, non-Christians think of Bible literalists as ignorant and brain-washed.
It has happened many times, that people have asked me how I can take some of the stands I do. Because I don't seem like a hayseed or an imbecile, they have a hard time understanding how I can believe the Bible is true. It carries over into the discussions on this blog. My last post, for instance, presented some historical evidence for the existence of man and dinosaur at the same time. The response has been general ridicule and/or wonderment that I could actually believe such things.
I have to say that from my point of view, the responses to my posts on this particular subject have been pretty weak. The literary assertions are old news and seem to me like a very lame attempt to dismiss hundreds of years of historical documentation. The references to Behemoth and Leviathan are from people who are not terribly familiar with the subject. In that particular case I didn't expect a lot since the people who are commenting for the most part don't believe the Bible is a valid source anyway and their heart may not be in it. But really, make fun if you will be all of those historical reports will remain and isn't it kind of whistling past the graveyard when all you can do is make fun because there is no other way?
How can someone be weird enough to believe that the Bible is true?
As a Christian, I have to say that for me it is intellectually dishonest for me to depend on one part of the book and dismiss other sections. I know quite well that some of the Bible is prophetic and some is allegorical. I know which parts those are. I know some of it is historical narrative. I recognize the allegorical for what it is and depend on the historical for being accurate. Bible scholars know how to differentiate between allegory and history based on various traits of the text - author, subject, audience, tone, language, time of writing - and have understood this for many centuries. The Bible is accurate in the original language. One has to keep an eye on translations to be sure one is following the text correctly. God didn't inspire the King James Bible even if the effort to compile it was remarkable. The New International Version is not a new Word from on high, just an attempt to translate the meaning in a more modern-friendly form.
The Bible asserts that it is the Word of God, that it was all inspired, that is that God inspired the individual men to write the words on parchment and whatever else they had at hand. It states that all of the scripture is profitable for correction and for doctrine and for learning. If you know the whole Bible, and it fits together quite nicely, then you have to compromise in some way to not accept it at face value if you are indeed a Christian.
I believe a God capable of creating all material things including the forces and time itself is quite capable of giving us a communication from Him for us to study. It is a matter of faith. This is faith, and either you have it or you don't.
Some who come here have faith in science that may be as deep and abiding as my faith in God. I respect the knowledge of many of you, even when I completely disagree. There are intelligent and dedicated people who comment here and I do appreciate them. To some extent they cannot understand my positions but then again we don't usually go there. Of course there are also Christians who comment who do agree with me and will also email me now and again and I do appreciate that.
To make it clear, that my position is (and seems unshakable) that the Bible is reliable as the Word of God and that we will find that the sum of the evidence we find in the fossil records and in organisms and also in outer space and the study of physics that eventually the position I take, now largely unpopular, will become the accepted position. I am not just saying I believe because I believe. I am saying the facts, to me, better represent my beliefs. It is a well reasoned position to take, based on the evidence I see and the world view I have.
Tomorrow, I will present a challenge to those on the other side of the fence. I am giving some specific examples of evidences of man and dinosaur together and will make it easy for you to refute or agree with them. At least, it is my hope that I can present these evidences in such a way that you will be able to address them clearly and individually.
"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."