Where is the liberalism in AYBD?
Comments
-
Robert Perron said:
You would be expecting to learn about the Bible as a closed system with internal consistency
The Bible does have internal consistency, but it isn't a closed system. It interacts with and is influenced by the world around it. It was penned in real times and places in history. Surely it is ultimately God's work through and through, but he used human beings who had access to other historic documents as their sources. Even the Bible itself refers to many of these external sources (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-canonical_books_referenced_in_the_Bible), so it does no good denying that there were such things or you'll end up with your own internal inconsistency. Studying to find out more about how the Bible relates to other Ancient Near Eastern literature should not detract from one's faith in the miraculous or the amazing consistency of the Bible, but it does help us to understand customs and ideas that are utterly foreign to our 21st century setting.
0 -
Robert Perron said:
Is JEDP the Biblical equivalent of Darwinism?
It depends on the disposition of the person who is advocating it. For many proponents, it leads to inevitable conclusions of non-inspiration and (because of the disconnect between Biblical assertions and the "conclusions" of DocHype theory) errancy within the Bible text. For these folks, the comparison to Darwinism would be apt--it is an explanation that neutralizes claims of Providential inspiration. There are others, many who were exposed to DocHype in cemetery, who basically only heard the one side of the argument and felt that the hypothesis was adequately proved but who still clung to their belief (George apparently is one of those), who find some way of getting these incompatible theories to co-exist (which inevitably results in the so-called "low view" of Scripture). For these folks, their perspective is not so much like Darwinism as it is like Theistic Evolutionists. These folks try to make room in their explanations for both science and Scripture--which tends to not give either the honor it deserves.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:Robert Perron said:
You would be expecting to learn about the Bible as a closed system with internal consistency
The Bible does have internal consistency, but it isn't a closed system. It interacts with and is influenced by the world around it. It was penned in real times and places in history. Surely it is ultimately God's work through and through, but he used human beings who had access to other historic documents as their sources. Even the Bible itself refers to many of these external sources (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-canonical_books_referenced_in_the_Bible), so it does no good denying that there were such things or you'll end up with your own internal inconsistency. Studying to find out more about how the Bible relates to other Ancient Near Eastern literature should not detract from one's faith in the miraculous or the amazing consistency of the Bible, but it does help us to understand customs and ideas that are utterly foreign to our 21st century setting.
I think there is a substantial amount of evidence--internal evidence [;)]--that suggests that the Bible is quite a bit like a closed system, at least in terms of how YHWH wants us to accept and respond to it. He is ALL about the revelation of the Word, and I have come to the conclusion that the "facts" we call "reality" are often counter-factual and counter-intuitive to His revelation precisely to test us as to which we will be swayed by. Before you say YHWH would never do that, you need to account for the fact that He says numerous time in numerous places that this is exactly what He is doing.
For instance, the "people with access to historical documents" notion (Q and its ilk), cannot account for prophecy that is utterly word-centric--i.e. the words of Scripture are literally crafted and chosen to accomplish their set tasks. The Book "as is" presents an organic, unified whole from Gen. 1 to Rev. 22.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
David Paul said:
"people with access to historical documents" notion (Q and its ilk)
Q is merely theorized (I don't care about it) and JEDP is a theory too, which I never pay any attention to in reading/studying the Bible. I'm talking about the documents that the Bible mentions. God put mention of those into the Bible, ergo he wanted us to know they existed. Not to undermine our understanding of Scripture as an organic, unified whole.
0 -
I think Rosie is referring to these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-canonical_books_referenced_in_the_Bible
0 -
Nick Steffen said:
I think Rosie is referring to these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-canonical_books_referenced_in_the_Bible
Yes, very astute Nick. I included that link too. David chose to ignore it.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:Nick Steffen said:
I think Rosie is referring to these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-canonical_books_referenced_in_the_Bible
Yes, very astute Nick. I included that link too. David chose to ignore it.
No, I wasn't ignoring them...I was simply addressing your "not a closed system" comment in a way that treats the meaning of that concept more fully than you intended.
Actually, one could almost wholly ignore the "document" sources mentioned in that Wikipedia article, as almost none of them exist as tangible text documents at this time, and the ones that do exist by name are almost certainly either pseudepigraphal or simply named like the earlier work. To say that these are evidence of a non-closed system is not giving the concept of a closed system the credit and vigorous vitality it deserves. None of those "sources" effects in any significant degree (or any degree at all?) whether Scripture is opened or closed.
In fact, a few years back I created this graphic to illustrate what I'm getting at. I arrived at this conclusion because cyclical (and thus circular) patterns are one of the most potent concepts in the prophetic constructs found in the Bible.
To say that the Bible is a circular argument is not only inevitable, it is also not to say that it is invalid. Circularity of reasoning is not a problem for YHWH...in many ways it is His bread and butter.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Robert Perron said:
You would be expecting to learn about the Bible as a closed system with internal consistency and you would expect a program like Logos to help you put the pieces together but as was mentioned in another discussion, a lot of the resources are spiritually deflationary.
If this were what one was looking for, I would not recommend Logos. As a closed system one would need nothing but a search, an atlas and possibly a dictionary. Everything else is outside the closed system.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
I get what you are saying, MJ, but I think you are stating either too much or not enough (maybe both?). Let's not forget that the closed system we are discussing (if indeed the Bible is one and/or the description doesn't lose more than it gains--I think it is valid) is created by the Creator who speaks things into and out of existence. To say the Bible is a closed system I think gives many people an impression that it is as a result "finite". That is a mistake. It can expand and contract according to the only relevant concern--the will of YHWH. His closed system may well include things we would think not compatible with a closed system. To put it in a succinct way, what I'm saying is this. The closed system of Scripture is the will of YHWH, which can literally be absolutely anything at all, including things we think both improbable and impossible. It is not static but is as fluid as His creative will provides.
Humans, in resources such as commentaries, are simply attempting to describe that system (often doing so very poorly since most don't perceive it correctly), but that doesn't mean that their efforts are outside the system. In the same way a broken clock is correct twice a day, even inept commentary is occasionally capable of describing in a satisfactory way certain facets of the closed system...making them part of that system.
Even more unexpected, perhaps, is that those who stridently insist that the system is an open system can be part of the closed system.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
DP, my answer was intended to be read in the framework of Robert's understanding - not necessarily mine and certainly not yours.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Fair enough, but my reply, though broad, was intended to address his concern. I see the Bible (and as a result, though paradoxically, the world as well) as a closed system. Even so, I have over 9,000 resources in my Logos library and look forward to five digits worth as soon as I can bring it to pass. Why? Because I find that these resources, even those which strongly disagree with my perception of the Bible's structure and message, help inform my understanding of that closed system. With this in mind, I think Robert is fine seeing Logos as a mechanism for exploring the closed system.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
David, the only sense in which I believe it is a closed system is that it's a closed canon. So there is no more going into it and no more coming out of it. (I know MJ and I would agree to disagree on what that accepted canon is; different groups recognize different canons.)
But as definitions go, in science a "closed system" is one that does not interact at all with the world around it. E.g., a test tube with a plug in the top so molecules of the chemicals inside cannot mix with the molecules of the gas outside.
I was using a definition rather like that scientific one when describing how the Word of God interacts with the world around it. It changes the world around it, and our understanding of it is changed by us being in relation with it from our position in the world outside the it. It isn't shut up in a test tube somewhere.
Yes, it is complete and self-contained, and in that sense I suppose you could call it a "closed system" but that's not what I meant when I was objecting to your characterization of it as such. Maybe we're just talking about different things and talking past each other (as is often the case when we dialogue here). I hope my thoughts are worth considering, even if they are on a topic that is tangential to what you were talking about.
0 -
Rosie, your thoughts are always worth considering. [:)] I think the difference between what you and I (and science for that matter) are describing as "closed" is simply one of scale. Scientists speak of "the arrow of time" and best guess that concept as being a function of the law of entropy. They assert that the state just prior to the Big Bang was the prime & primeval state of (perfect?) order from which the results of the Big Bang would properly be called "degeneration" and "disorder" (i.e. chaos). They have a (I think unrecognized) assumption that nearness equals order and the vast distance and constant change that results from the ever-expanding universe is less orderly than what existed in the "singularity". But what if that is totally backwards? What if the distances being created are allowing for the matter of the universe to achieve an order it did not have when everything was packed willy-nilly into a single point? [This, of course, is theoretical--the Big Bang is pretty much demanded by physics, but it may not have ever occurred. YHWH, I am pretty much convinced, may have deliberately designed the creation to appear to have a "history" (a la the BB) that it simply didn't have because He created it in seven days six-thousand years ago.]
My point, I guess, is that creation appears to be open but is in fact closed, and even the assumption about what constitutes open and closed in the minds of scientists may be skewed for that reason. If you could pull back from the expanding universe in a Google Earth "eagle eye" sort of view, it may appear to be taking on shape and form that we are simply incapable of recognizing from our vantage point.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
I was using a definition rather like that scientific one when describing how the Word of God interacts with the world around it. It changes the world around it, and our understanding of it is changed by us being in relation with it from our position in the world outside the it. It isn't shut up in a test tube somewhere.
I kinda view Creation as the test tube...and to be even more specific, Creation as revealed in the Bible (as opposed to the tangible one that we "see" and "know" with our senses and think of as undeniably "real"...though it is passing away). To make this a bit clearer, the physical world was created in Gen. 1, but that, in a sense, isn't the world that matters, especially since it leads people astray (I think by Design). The world that matters is the world of Biblical revelation, which can at times literally deny the "literal" (i.e. tangible) world through miracles and whatnot.
In other words, the Bible is a universe and creation unto itself with its own laws. It obviously interacts with "our" world, but we are supposed to choose to live by the rules of the revealed (Biblical) universe, not the tangible one that we are in, and was created to "contain" us, but which as a carnal world, we are supposed to deny.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:
closed system is that it's a closed canon. So there is no more going into it and no more coming out of it. (I know MJ and I would agree to disagree on what that accepted canon is; different groups recognize different canons.)
Some don't consider it closed ...e.g. Latter-Day Saints[;)]
Edit after verifying my memory re: Quakers:
"In the first half of the nineteenth century, a diverse contingent of American religious figures promoted the idea of an open canon of divine revelation. Transcendentalists, Hicksite Quakers, Mormons and Shakers defined their faith against a culture that they accused of relegating religion's defining revelations to the ancient past."
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
David Paul said:
It obviously interacts with "our" world
That's all I was trying to say. So we're actually on the same page (again, a rare occurrence).
All that stuff about Big Bang and all seemed completely tangential to the discussion. You're trying to confuse people. I never said anything about Big Bang.
A closed system is inert, dead, has no impact on the world around it. The Bible is a living breathing thing, sharper than any two-edged sword, able to divide soul and spirit, joints and marrow. I think we both agree on that, so I'm not sure why you keep insisting on dragging other things into the conversation to make it seem like we disagree about science and all that, which isn't what I was trying to dredge up. I just don't think it's helpful to use the terminology "closed system" when talking about the Bible because of all that it implies. You can't put God in a box and close it up and think you've got him completely figured out, nor can you do that with Scripture. Neither one can be contained in or limited by the confines of our human reason. Infinity, my friend, is not a closed system. God is infinite.
David Paul said:Rosie, your thoughts are always worth considering.
Thank you!
David Paul said:creation appears to be open but is in fact closed
Well, that's a whole different ball of wax than saying the Bible is a closed system, which is what you were saying before (maybe you've changed your mind on that now, though, after considering my points). So you've pulled the rug right out from under me and changed what we were talking about. Very sneaky.
I understand what you mean when you say that creation is a closed system. However God can (and does) still intervene from outside the system. He is both inside and intimately connected with his creation (he became incarnate and entered into it) and outside it (its Creator). So when he intervenes to do something miraculous (and I believe that miracles still occur), he is showing that the system of creation is not a "closed system" as scientists would define it. If it were a completely closed system, then Christ could not come again. In fact, he couldn't have come in the first place.
0 -
I don't see Scripture as either closed or open ... But dynamic and cumulative. It doesn't need to accumulate new information ... We need to accumulate the ability to access what's already there. We can scratch around on the surface using our own devices, Or plumb the depths by asking Him to help us see what was there all the time. I think Jesus' instruction to become as little children is Very profound ! Children seem to accept their limitations. They are not offended when someone suggests they don't know it all. They are willing to seek and accept help in learning new things. [:D] (This changes in the teen years. ... Especially for girls.) [:P]
0
