cathbad
Member
I felt this was a more appropriate place to post my response to the quagmire of a thread in the reef forum, and if it needs to be deleted I understand completely. Generally, I avoid even reading threads about religion and politics but this time I could not restrain myself.
Science and religion, being two very intense interest of mine (I attended a parochial elementary school and graduated from a parochial high school and minored in religious studies in a relatively conservative university), for many years, seemed to me to be mutually exclusive. I was never able to reconcile want was being discovered and the thoughts about our physical origins that were being developed in the scientific world with the my traditional Christian belief about those same origins. This was a point of much conflict for me because religion, the Bible, could not give the answer to what science was asking, "Where did we come from?" I was taught to believe that all life's questions could be answered by God's word given to us in the Old and New Testaments. And yes I am today very conservative in my religious (and political) faith and beliefs and I do belief that the Bible is the infallible word of God, now lets talk about what that word says.
Just as there are different types of literature in the library so there are different types of literature in the Bible, after all just as a library, the Bible is a collection of literary works written by different people. For example, a parable is different from a psalm or a narrative and each is understood to be written for different purposes and to mean different things. The meaning of a narrative may be meant to be literal whereas a parable probably is not meant to be literal. Without studying the original Hebrew (which I have) one may not easily notice the different literary styles in the Old Testament. It just so happens that the first several chapters of Genesis are written in much the same style as like Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. No one takes Homer's work to be complete historical fact, but these creation writings are.
Many ask where we came from, only some look to science for the answer and some to religion. Both given valid answers if one understands the purposes of both science and religion and with what aspects of life each deals. Science addresses the corporeal realm of existence, religion with the metaphysical/spiritual realm. Perhaps it is more appropriate to ask science "Where do we come from?" and to ask religion "Why are we here?".
If one reads the first part of Genesis from the point-of-view of a creator attempting to explain to his chosen people who he is, why he is, who they are, why they are and attempting to reveal himself to those people the more valid (in my opinion) explanation for the creation story is much more revealing.
For me this understanding if more real than putting God in a box by saying that he did create everything in this way alone despite the evidence all around me saying that it was done by another means. Call it theistic creationism, deism or creation by intelligent design it is science being scientific and religion being religious.
Sorry for the verbosity but I feel that too many are arguing the point without actually knowing what the point is. Even though I could continue on for pages I think I will end here.
FINIS
Science and religion, being two very intense interest of mine (I attended a parochial elementary school and graduated from a parochial high school and minored in religious studies in a relatively conservative university), for many years, seemed to me to be mutually exclusive. I was never able to reconcile want was being discovered and the thoughts about our physical origins that were being developed in the scientific world with the my traditional Christian belief about those same origins. This was a point of much conflict for me because religion, the Bible, could not give the answer to what science was asking, "Where did we come from?" I was taught to believe that all life's questions could be answered by God's word given to us in the Old and New Testaments. And yes I am today very conservative in my religious (and political) faith and beliefs and I do belief that the Bible is the infallible word of God, now lets talk about what that word says.
Just as there are different types of literature in the library so there are different types of literature in the Bible, after all just as a library, the Bible is a collection of literary works written by different people. For example, a parable is different from a psalm or a narrative and each is understood to be written for different purposes and to mean different things. The meaning of a narrative may be meant to be literal whereas a parable probably is not meant to be literal. Without studying the original Hebrew (which I have) one may not easily notice the different literary styles in the Old Testament. It just so happens that the first several chapters of Genesis are written in much the same style as like Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. No one takes Homer's work to be complete historical fact, but these creation writings are.
Many ask where we came from, only some look to science for the answer and some to religion. Both given valid answers if one understands the purposes of both science and religion and with what aspects of life each deals. Science addresses the corporeal realm of existence, religion with the metaphysical/spiritual realm. Perhaps it is more appropriate to ask science "Where do we come from?" and to ask religion "Why are we here?".
If one reads the first part of Genesis from the point-of-view of a creator attempting to explain to his chosen people who he is, why he is, who they are, why they are and attempting to reveal himself to those people the more valid (in my opinion) explanation for the creation story is much more revealing.
For me this understanding if more real than putting God in a box by saying that he did create everything in this way alone despite the evidence all around me saying that it was done by another means. Call it theistic creationism, deism or creation by intelligent design it is science being scientific and religion being religious.
Sorry for the verbosity but I feel that too many are arguing the point without actually knowing what the point is. Even though I could continue on for pages I think I will end here.
FINIS
