Augustine on Creation
by BradfordComments in response to the post A California Ruling reminded me that hostile critiques frequently overlook nuances inherent to the object of the hostility. Teacher James Corbett's harsh depiction of creationism is not fully conveyed by the Times article. Critical analysis demands an understanding of the object of the criticism.
Alister McGrath authored Augustine's Origin of Species. The author delves into the beliefs of an early prominent Christian named Augustine. The fact that his analysis of Genesis took place well before the time of Darwin removes from consideration the idea that related apologetics were fashioned in response to empirical data. Among the commentary was this:
Augustine also argues that Scripture teaches that time is also part of the created order, that God created space and time together. For some, however, the idea of time as a created thing seemed ridiculous. Again, Augustine counters that the biblical narrative is not open to alternative interpretations. Time must therefore be thought of as one of God's creatures and servants. For Augustine, time itself is an element of the created order. Timelessness, on the other hand, is the essential feature of eternity.
So what was God doing before he created the universe? Augustine undermines the question by pointing out that God did not bring creation into being at a certain definite moment in time, because time did not exist prior to creation. For Augustine, eternity is a realm without space or time. Interestingly, this is precisely the state of existence many scientists posit existed before the big bang.
May 10th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
I happen to own a copy of Augustine’s, Literal Meaning of Genesis. There are several interesting things I noticed when I read it a couple of years ago.
First he explores the possibility that there is “a kind of figurative and allegorical understanding of day and evening and morning” used in the creation account of Genesis 1.
Second, he argues that “ordinary days, which are unfolded and folded up again by the rotation of light from the heavenly bodies, bear a kind of shadowy resemblance to those primordial [or creation] days.”
In other words, Augustine didn’t interpret the creation days in Genesis 1 as ordinary days.
On the other hand, Augustine’s interpretation was not along the lines of a day-age interpretation. He argued that God really created “the whole created universe… simultaneously” The purpose of the account of the six days in Genesis 1 then was “telling the story of God’s work through these days.” In other words, if I am reading him correctly here, God literally created everything all at once, but used the account of the six days to tell the story to us.
My point very simply is that Augustine wasn’t bound to the literal meaning of day that YEC’s insist is the only way to interpret the first chapter of Genesis. Next to the apostle Paul, Augustine is probably the most influential Christian theologian in history.
Comment by JOHN_A_DESIGNER — May 10, 2009 @ 8:16 pm
May 11th, 2009 at 4:38 am
"The fact that his analysis of Genesis took place well before the time of Darwin removes from consideration the idea that related apologetics were fashioned in response to empirical data."
That's right. As the article shows, Augustine was actually troubled by the fact that the creation story in Genesis 1:1-2:3 conflicts with the creation story told in Genesis 2:4-2:25.
There are also problems reconciling those verses with Psalm 33 and John 5:17.
And that's not even getting into the talking snake problem.
Augustine's "solution" to this problem was to allegorize the living daylights out of Genesis so it would support almost any theory.
By the way, the "conventional" modern solution to the conflicts between Genesis 1:1-2:3 and 2:4-2:25 is that they were orginally two different versions of the Hebrew creation myth, one from Israel and one from Judea. Sometime after the return from the Babylonian Captivity, the two holy books from the two nations were hammered into the single version we have today by a very skillful writer. See "Who Wrote the Bible" by Richard Friedman for the details.
Comment by chiltone — May 11, 2009 @ 4:38 am
May 11th, 2009 at 4:39 am
I'm sure Augustine was a very clever fellow, but he was also extremely ignorant compared to what we now know about the natural world. His ideas are interesting speculations – no more no less. His interpretation of Genesis is one of many, all equally subjective, and in the end quite useless for science or ID.
Comment by Raevmo — May 11, 2009 @ 4:39 am
May 11th, 2009 at 7:20 am
chiltone
It’s important to remember that the prevailing “scientific” theory in Augustine’s time was that matter was eternal and the universe was cyclical alternating between chaos and cosmos .
His take would definitely not fit that one at the time he would have been seen as an anti science fundamentalist .
I’m not sure how you are defining conventional but the standard “solution” in my neck of the woods is to see the two passages as two different accounts of the same event one from the God’s perspective and one from man’s .
As for your theory it’s important to remember there is absolutely no evidence that it is correct and it presupposes that the complier of Genesis far from being skilled was an idiot who could not see contradictions in his sources.
Raevmo
I agree but they are illustrative for those who believe that they must choose between science and the Bible. Augustine (and all the church fathers) are proof that this is not the case
Peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 11, 2009 @ 7:20 am
May 11th, 2009 at 8:58 am
Raevmo
I also agree, but I don't think the point of this post was to make a scientific hypothesis. It just shows that theists with viewpoints like this aren't just responding to scientific discoveries, trying to preserve their faith. These viewpoints existed for centuries before modern science
Comment by uoflcard — May 11, 2009 @ 8:58 am
May 11th, 2009 at 8:59 am
Raevmo:
Nevertheless, even during Augustine’s time there was apparent conflict between theology and what we would call natural science. Augustine’s timeless advice about this conflict is surprisingly modern and up-to-date.
Early in, The Literal Meaning of Genesis (Book I), he writes:
I don’t think that is useless advice.
Comment by JOHN_A_DESIGNER — May 11, 2009 @ 8:59 am
May 11th, 2009 at 10:07 am
J_A_D,
I know that passage. Good tactical advice indeed, but the "even a non-Christian knows…" part is perhaps a bit outdated and might even offend some readers.
The problem for Christians is, of course, once you admit that parts of the bible are utterly foolish and untrue statements, then it is hard to resist the conclusion that the rest of the bible should also be taken with a generous quantity of salt. The possible defense that parts of the bible are allegory and other parts aren't smacks a bit like subjective cherry picking to me.
Comment by Raevmo — May 11, 2009 @ 10:07 am
May 11th, 2009 at 11:58 am
Here I think things like literary criticism and asking the sorts of questions that historians would ask helps. For example, regarding the creation story, how much does the style and language resemble that used in the myths of neighboring cultures? How much does it share in common with the scientific views of neighboring cultures (e.g., the "firmament")? Historically, what witnesses do we or could we have to the events said to have happened?
Compare that to the Gospel accounts of Jesus. How much do they share in common with neighboring myths, regarding style and language? How much do they share with in common with other attempts at serious historical writing of their day? What witnesses do we or could we have to the events said to have happened?
So even though at first it might look like cherry picking, I think on closer view we can identify objective criteria that help distinguish some kinds of literature in the Bible from other kinds of literature.
Comment by Bilbo — May 11, 2009 @ 11:58 am
May 11th, 2009 at 11:59 am
BTW, what were the Christians of Augustine's day saying about the creation stories that caused Augustine such embarrassment?
Comment by Bilbo — May 11, 2009 @ 11:59 am
May 11th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
Utterly foolish?
You must have been stretching for a more polemical adjective.
You give him the most ungracious reading possible. I wonder what motivates you. All of these years, to argue about something utterly foolish. Because I'm certain you feel that way about the topics here in general. That's at least 4 years that I'm aware of. For you to argue and argue and mock about something so utterly foolish.
I don't know. That's just odd to me. Really odd.
But either way. The Bible shouldn't be taken with a grain of salt. There are indeed areas that are meant to be read literally, some that is allegory and metaphor. It's not like the Bible has just one author. Numerous, unique conduits all with something to say. Some report, some tell stories. And that should be expected from a book with so many contributors seperate geographically and temporally. But for you it's just foolish.
all of these years, arguing about something as clear as day.
At the best you're just pathetic. Because that's what anyone would think about someone arguing for all of these years about something so utterly foolish.
Comment by GringoRoyale — May 11, 2009 @ 5:49 pm
May 11th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Gringo,
Lighten up, will you? I was quoting Augustine:
[my emph]
Comment by Raevmo — May 11, 2009 @ 5:58 pm
May 11th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Raevmo
With all due respect to my homeboy Augustine I happen to believe that the Bible contains no allegory. It does contain lots of typology but that is a different animal altogether. The fact is you can read Genesis to be actual literal history and still believe in an old earth and common decent (at least for animals).
In fact I would contend that a literal reading that leaves open that possibility is way that most Christians have read the book down through the ages at least up until the advent of the scientific revolution and the age of discovery.
I know that sounds a little strange and it’s an issue that is much to in-depth to cover in any dental here but here is a link to a recent discussion I had about it with some YEC friends to give you a taste of what I’m talking about.
Peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 11, 2009 @ 6:16 pm
May 11th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
Raevmo,
That would be a problem. But Augustine never made such an admission. He was referring to the foolishness of ignorant Christians, not of scripture.
Comment by David Heddle — May 11, 2009 @ 7:24 pm
May 12th, 2009 at 2:55 am
chiltone: By the way, the "conventional" modern solution to the conflicts between Genesis 1:1-2:3 and 2:4-2:25 is that they were orginally two different versions of the Hebrew creation myth, one from Israel and one from Judea.
fifth monarchy man: I’m not sure how you are defining conventional but the standard “solution” in my neck of the woods is to see the two passages as two different accounts of the same event one from the God’s perspective and one from man’s .
As for your theory it’s important to remember there is absolutely no evidence that it is correct and it presupposes that the complier of Genesis far from being skilled was an idiot who could not see contradictions in his sources.
I'm defining "conventional" in this case as "following the evidence to a conclusion and not bending the evidence to support a religious belief". Your example of one story being from God's point of view and one from Man's is an example of the latter.
As for the compiler of Genesis (and the rest of the Torah) being an idiot, I'd say he was a lot closer to a genius. In "Who Wrote the Bible", Friedman identifies this Redactor as Ezra. I'm sure Ezra saw the contradictions, but he was trying to combine two different stories in such a way that two different nations could worship from the same book and since his results have lasted for over two thousand years, I'd say he did fairly well.
Get a copy of the book, either from your library or better yet buy a copy from Amazon (under $11.00 new or $4.00 used) or some other book store and read what Friedman says. Particularly, read his examples where he pulls the text we have today apart into their original stories. You can't do that with "The Bobbsey Twins Go to the Beach"!
Comment by chiltone — May 12, 2009 @ 2:55 am
May 12th, 2009 at 3:01 am
raevmo: The problem for Christians is, of course, once you admit that parts of the bible are utterly foolish and untrue statements,
heddle: That would be a problem. But Augustine never made such an admission. He was referring to the foolishness of ignorant Christians, not of scripture.
The "foolishness" of those ignorant Christians was to quote parts of the Bible that were clearly wrong to non-Christians who knew better, thus making them think the entire Bible was trash. Why else would Augustine go to such lengths to allegorize scripture?
Comment by chiltone — May 12, 2009 @ 3:01 am
May 12th, 2009 at 4:51 am
chiltone,
No it wasn't. What is clear to to anyone with half a brain who has read Augustine–check that you don't even have to have read him but rather simply posses a modicum of common sense, is that he was criticizing Christians who misuse scripture to support incorrect scientific views, views that are not demanded by all viable exegeses of the text, usually just by a hyper-literal one. You may want to believe that what he was actually saying was: the bible is wrong, so we have to drop it for certain discussions, but that would be pure fantasy. Or at least you should be clear that that is what you say, not what Augustine said or implied.
For example, Luther used the "sun stood still" passage in Joshua to criticize Copernican heliocentricity. This, I believe, is a prime example of what Augustine was talking about. He would not have said that the passage in Joshua was wrong, he would have said it was foolish of Luther to misuse it.
Comment by David Heddle — May 12, 2009 @ 4:51 am
May 12th, 2009 at 7:33 am
You have no evidence at all that leads to your conclusion. There are no documents that contain only one of the two creation stories and there is no evidence of Ezra’s skillful deceit leading to the merger of two cultures into one.
What you have is pure naked speculation based on the fact that the two stories sound different to your modern ears but that the acients had no problem at all with.
Oh the contrary I think your speculation is a classic example of bending (and even inventing )the evidence to support a religious belief
Do you honestly think I am not aware of this kind of snip and cut scholarship. It is common knowledge in my circles.
You can make any text to say any thing with a pair of scissors.
The various theories contradict each other to the point that what you have left is mumbo jumbo. And all of this kind of thing is done with out the slightest bit of external evidence only the “scholar’s” vivid imagination serving his cause.
peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 12, 2009 @ 7:33 am
May 13th, 2009 at 3:32 am
Heddle: "For example, Luther used the "sun stood still" passage in Joshua to criticize Copernican heliocentricity. This, I believe, is a prime example of what Augustine was talking about. He would not have said that the passage in Joshua was wrong, he would have said it was foolish of Luther to misuse it."
Here's Joshua 10:13 "And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day."
How did Luther misuse this passage if it was right? Are you claiming that the late bronze age/early iron age author of Joshua 10:13 didn't mean that the sun and moon were halted, that he really meant that the earth's revolution was stopped? I doubt if that ever even occured to him!
Luther took a factually incorrect passage from Joshua and used it to argue that the sun revolves around a fixed earth. This was a foolish thing for Luther to do, but he did not misrepresent scripture to do it.
And episodes like that are why Augustine went to such lengths to allelgorize scripture into harmlessness. Those and the talking snakes.
Comment by chiltone — May 13, 2009 @ 3:32 am
May 13th, 2009 at 4:45 am
chiltone,
Hmm. I'm beginning to see that this will be a waste of time. Does that question even make sense? We can grant that the passage is right. If Luther interpreted it incorrectly for purposes of denying an established aspect of general revelation (science), without even questioning the possibility that his interpretation was in error, then he misused it. Just like if he presented passages that mention a sunrise as proof of geocentricism he would have been misusing those passages. The only thing you can really say is that in light of not knowing the truth of the Copernican view, it would be understandable to misinterpret such passages. Even then you would be misusing them by taking statements meant to represent appearances as statements of science fact.
This happens even in science books. You can open up virtually any Quantum Mechanics book and find sentences like: the electron knew to… describing the appearance of the electron's 'behavior', not as a scientific statement.
And this matters, how? We can assume that Moses or Joshua believed that the earth rotated about the sun, yet their writing about a sunrise does not mean the bible teaches a geocentric view.
Let me summarize what your point really is, because I've encountered it a thousand times before and I can say it better and more honestly than you. Your point really is:
I am going to demand that the only possible interpretation of Genesis is the YEC interpretation. Why? Because that makes it trivial to show that the Genesis creation account is incompatible with science. Any interpretation that that might reconcile Genesis creates too much work, so I'll summarily dismiss those as desperate allegories. I'll add in the parroted 'talking snakes' to make me look clever and to obscure the fact that I'm not actually saying anything of substance.
Which is fine–although going about as a cliche must get boring. But you probably don't want to use Augustine as your example–for his creation account, in which the six days is compressed into an instant (his God don't need no six days) is even more spectacular than the YEC account and just as incompatible with science.
Comment by David Heddle — May 13, 2009 @ 4:45 am
May 14th, 2009 at 4:08 am
I'm beginning to your reputation is correct and arguing with you is more or less useless, but I'll try to explain what I mean once more.
At some time in the distant past, an author sat down with pen in hand and wrote some words that said, "… the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies." I believe that the author meant exactly what he wrote – that the sun and the moon STOOD STILL long enough for Joshua to win a battle. I believe he meant that the sun and moon stood still because the conventional view in those days was that the earth was flat and the sky was a dome stretched across it and the sun, moon, planets and stars moved across this dome once each day.
I realize that this view was incorrect and you realize that this view was incorrect, BUT THE AUTHOR OF JOSHUA WOULD HAVE DISAGREED WITH BOTH OF US. HE believed that the sun and moon moved across the sky, just as his eyes showed him and the people who read his book believed the same thing. THE TRUE MEANING OF THIS BIBLICAL PASSAGE IS THAT THE SUN AND MOON MOVE ACROSS THE SKY AND THAT THEY STOPPED DEAD STILL ON THIS OCCASION.
You can disagree with the Bible on this. You can have your own interpretation of what really happened. But your belief does not change what the Bible means by one iota.
The author of Joshua wrote that the sun and moon stopped. His words ended up in the Bible. The Bible's meaning, therefore, was that the sun and moon stopped in their journey across the sky.
Luther did not misinterpret Joshua. He correctly interpreted the Bible's meaning: the sun and moon stopped. He used that correct interpretation as evidence against the Copernican theory. Luther was correct about the Bible, the Bible was factually incorrect about the movement of the sun and moon. Luther ended up embarassing himself and the Bible. This is what Augustine was warning about.
Why do you knock Young Earth Creationists? You know, we used to have another label for YECs, a label that lasted from the first century until just a few hundred years ago. We called them Christians. (Before that we called them Jews.) Every Christian was a YEC in those days because they had no inkling that the earth had been formed any earlier than circa 4000 BC, as the Bible says.
When evidence for a much older earth became too strong to ignore, Christians went one of two ways: Some distorted science to make it agree with Scripture. We call them YECs today. Others distorted Scripture to make it agree with Science.
Both are wrong. You can't re-interpret Scripture to give it a meaning 180 degrees away from the meaning the original authors gave it. And you can't re-interpret science to make it agree with scripture. It's not that it's too much work, it's because it's immoral to tell lies about what the authors of Scripture meant by their words. Both practices are equally wrong.
Comment by chiltone — May 14, 2009 @ 4:08 am
May 14th, 2009 at 7:10 am
fifth monarchy man: "You have no evidence at all that leads to your conclusion."
I have no evidence, but there's plenty of it in "Who Wrote the Bible". There's a copy waiting for you at your library. I guarantee you'll find it interesting.
fmm: "You can make any text to say any thing with a pair of scissors."
Not in this case. The two sources, J and P weren't just sliced and diced and pasted back together any which way. They were carefully interleaved. Friedman is kind enough to give us an example. It's Genesis 6:5-8:22, which contains most of the Flood story. Friedman prints the "J" material in regular type and the "P" material in all caps.
Lower case = "J" UPPER CASE = "P"
GENESIS 6:
5 And Yahweh saw that the evil of humans was great in the earth, and all the inclination of the thoughts of their heart was only evil all the day.
6 And Yahweh regretted that he had made humans in the earth, and he was grieved to his heart.
7 And Yahweh said, "I shall wipe out the humans which I have created from the face of the earth, from human to beast to creeping thing to bird of the heavens, for I regret that I have made them."
8 But Noah found favor in Yahweh's eyes.
9 THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF NOAH: NOAH WAS A RIGHTEOUS MAN, PERFECT IN HIS GENERATIONS. NOAH WALKED WITH GOD.
10 AND NOAH SIRED THREE SONS: SHEM, HAM AND JAPHETH.
11 AND THE EARTH WAS CORRUPTED BEFORE GOD, AND THE EARTH WAS FILLED WITH VIOLENCE.
12 AND GOD SAW THE EARTH, AND HERE IT WAS CORRUPTED, FOR ALL FLESH HAD CORRUPTED ITS WAY ON THE EARTH.
13 AND GOD SAID TO NOAH, "THE END OF ALL FLESH HAS COME BEFORE ME, FOR THE EARTH IS FILLED WITH VIOLENCE BECAUSE OF THEM, AND HERE I AM GOING TO DESTROY THEM WITH THE EARTH.
14 MAKE YOURSELF AN ARK OF GOPHER WOOD, MAKE ROOMS WITH THE ARK, AND PITCH IT OUTSIDE AND INSIDE WITH PITCH.
15 AND THIS IS HOW YOU SHALL MAKE IT: THREE HUNDRED CUBITS THE LENGTH OF THE ARK, FIFTY CUBITS ITS WIDTH, AND THIRTY CUBITS ITS HEIGHT.
16 YOU SHALL MAKE A WINDOW FOR THE ARK, AND YOU SHALL FINISH IT TO A CUBIT FROM THE TOP, AND YOU SHALL MAKE AN ENTRANCE TO THE ARK IN ITS SIDE. YOU SHALL MAKE LOWER, SECOND AND THIRD STORIES FOR IT.
17 AND HERE I AM BRINGING THE FLOOD, WATER OVER THE EARTH, TO DESTROY ALL FLESH IN WHICH IS THE BREATH OF LIFE FROM UNDER THE HEAVENS. EVERYTHING WHICH IS ON THE LAND WILL DIE.
18 AND I SHALL ESTABLISH MY COVENANT WITH YOU. AND YOU SHALL COME TO THE ARK, YOU AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR WIFE AND YOUR SON'S WIVES WITH YOU.
19 AND OF ALL THE LIVING, OF ALL FLESH, YOU SHALL BRING TWO TO THE ARK TO KEEP ALIVE WITH YOU, THEY SHALL BE MALE AND FEMALE.
20 OF THE BIRDS ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND OF THE BEASTS ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, TWO OF EACH WILL COME TO YOU TO KEEP ALIVE.
21 AND YOU, TAKE FOR YOURSELF OF ALL FOOD WHICH WILL BE EATEN AND GATHER IT TO YOU, AND IT WILL BE FOR YOU AND FOR THEM FOR FOOD."
22 AND NOAH DID ACCORDING TO ALL THAT GOD COMMAND HIM – SO HE DID.
GENESIS 7:
1 And Yahweh said to Noah, "Come, you and all your household to the ark, for I have seen you as righteous before me in this generation.
2 Of all the clean beasts, take yourself seven pairs, man and his woman; and of the beasts which are not clean, two, man and his woman.
3 Also of the birds of the heavens seven pairs, male and female, to keep alive seed on the face of the earth.
4 For in seven more days I shall rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and I shall wipe out all the substance that I have made from up on the face of the earth."
5 And Noah did according to all that Yahweh had commanded him.
6 AND NOAH WAS SIX HUNDRED YEARS OLD, AND THE FLOOD WAS ON THE EARTH.
7 And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons' wives with him came ot the ark from before the waters of the flood.
8 OF THE CLEAN BEASTS AND OF THE BEASTS WHICH WERE NOT CLEAN, AND OF THE BIRDS AND OF ALL THOSE WHICH CREEP UPON THE EARTH,
9 TWO OF EACH CAME TO NOAH TO THE ARK, MALE AND FEMALE, AS GOD HAD COMMANDED NOAH.
10 And seven days later the waters of the flood were on the earth.
11 IN THE SIX HUNDREDTH YEAR OF NOAH'S LIFE, IN THE SECOND MONTH, IN THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF THE MONTH, ON THIS DAY ALL THE FOUNTAINS OF THE GREAT DEEP WERE BROKEN UP, AND THE WINDOWS OF THE HEAVENS WERE OPENED.
12 And there was rain on the earth, forty days and forty nights.
13 IN THIS VERY DAY, NOAH AND SHEM, HAM, AND JAPHETH, THE SONS OF NOAH, AND NOAH'S WIFE AND HIS SONS' THREE WIVES WITH THEM CAME TO THE ARK.
14 THEY AND ALL THE LIVING THINGS ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND ALL THE BEASTS ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND ALL THE CREEPING THINGS THAT CREEP ON THE EARTH ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND ALL THE BIRDS ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND EVERY WINGED BIRD.
15 AND THEY CAME TO NOAH TO THE ARK, TWO OF EACH, OF ALL FLESH IN WHICH IS THE BREATH OF LIFE.
16 AND THOSE WHICH CAME WERE MALE AND FEMALE, SOME OF ALL FLESH CAME, AS GOD HAD COMMANDED HIM. And Yahweh closed it for him.
17 And the flood was on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and the waters multiplied and raised the ark, and it was lifted from the earth.
18 And the waters grew strong and multiplied greatly on the earth, and the ark went on the surface of the waters.
19 And the waters grew very very strong on the earth, and they covered all the high mountains that are under all the heavens.
20 Fifteen cubits above, the waters grew stronger, and they covered the mountains.
21 AND ALL FLESH, THOSE THAT CREEP ON THE EARTH, THE BIRDS, THE BEASTS, AND THE WILD ANIMALS, AND ALL THE SWARMING THINGS THAT SWARM ON THE EARTH, AND ALL THE HUMANS EXPIRED.
22 Everything that had the breathing spirit of life in its nostrils, everything that was on the dry ground, died.
23 And he wiped out all the substance that was on the face of the earth, from human to beast, to creeping thing, and to bird of the heavens, and they were wiped out from the earth, and only Noah and those who were with him in the ark were left.
24 AND THE WATERS GREW STRONG ON THE EARTH A HUNDRED FIFTY DAYS.
GENESIS 8:
1 AND GOD REMEMBERED NOAH AND ALL THE LIVING, AND ALL THE BEASTS THAT WERE WITH HIM IN THE ARK, AND GOD PASSSED A WIND OVER THE EARTH, AND THE WATERS WERE DECREASED.
2 AND THE FOUNTAINS OF THE DEEP AND THE WINDOWS OF THE HEAVENS WERE SHUT, and the rain was restrained from the heavens.
3 And the waters receded from the earth continually, AND THE WATERS WERE ABATED AT THE END OF A HUNDRED FIFTY DAYS.
4 AND THE ARK RESTED, IN THE SEVENTH MONTH, IN THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF THE MONTH, ON THE MOUNTAINS OF ARARAT.
5 AND THE WATERS CONTINUED RECEDING UNTIL THE TENTH MONTH; IN THE TENTH MONTH, ON THE FIRST OF THE MONTH, THE TOPS OF THE MOUNTAINS APPEARED.
6 And it was at the end of forty days, and Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made.
7 AND HE SENT OUT A RAVEN, AND IT WENT BACK AND FORTH UNTIL THE WATERS DRIED UP FROM THE EARTH.
8 And he sent out a dove from him to see whether the waters had eased from the face of the earth.
9 And the dove did not find a resting place for its foot, and it returned to him to the ark, for waters were on the face of the earth and he put out his hand and took it and brought it to him to the ark.
10 And he waited seven more days, and he again sent out a dove from the ark.
11 And the dove came to him at evening time, and here was an olive leaf torn off in its mouth, and Noah knew that the waters had eased from the earth.
12 And he waited seven more days, and he sent out a dove, and it did not return to him ever again.
13 AND IT WAS IN THE SIX HUNDRED AND FIRST YEAR, IN THE FIRST MONTH, ON THE FIRST OF THE MONTH, THE WATERS DRIED FROM THE EARTH. And Noah turned back the covering of the ark and looked, and here the face of the earth had dried.
14 AND IN THE SECOND MONTH, ON THE TWENTY-SEVENTH DAY OF THE MONTH, THE EARTH DRIED UP.
15 AND GOD SPOKE TO NOAH, SAYING,
16 "GO OUT FROM THE ARK, YOU AND YOUR WIFE AND YOUR SON'S WIVES WITH YOU.
17 ALL THE LIVING THINGS THAT ARE WITH YOU, OF ALL FLESH, OF THE BIRDS, AND OF THE BEASTS, AND OF ALL THE CREEPING THINGS THAT CREEP ON THE EARTH, THAT GO OUT WITH YOU, SHALL SWARM IN THE EARTH AND BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY IN THE EARTH."
18 AND NOAH AND HIS SONS AND HIS WIFE AND HIS SONS' WIVES WENT OUT.
19 ALL THE LIVING THINGS, ALL THE CREEPING THINGS AND ALL THE BIRDS, ALL THAT CREEP ON THE EARTH, BY THEIR FAMILIES, THEY WENT OUT OF THE ARK.
20 And Noah built an altar to Yahweh, and he took some of each of the clean beasts and of each of the clean birds, and he offered sacrifices on the altar.
21 And Yahweh smelled the pleasant smell, and Yahweh said to his heart, "I shall not again curse the ground on man's account, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from their youth, and I shall not again strike all the living as I have done.
22 All the rest of the days of the earth, seed and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease."
Comment by chiltone — May 14, 2009 @ 7:10 am
May 14th, 2009 at 7:11 am
Here's the J story alone:
GENESIS 6:
5 And Yahweh saw that the evil of humans was great in the earth, and all the inclination of the thoughts of their heart was only evil all the day.
6 And Yahweh regretted that he had made humans in the earth, and he was grieved to his heart.
7 And Yahweh said, "I shall wipe out the humans which I have created from the face of the earth, from human to beast to creeping thing to bird of the heavens, for I regret that I have made them."
8 But Noah found favor in Yahweh's eyes.
GENESIS 7:
1 And Yahweh said to Noah, "Come, you and all your household to the ark, for I have seen you as righteous before me in this generation.
2 Of all the clean beasts, take yourself seven pairs, man and his woman; and of the beasts which are not clean, two, man and his woman.
3 Also of the birds of the heavens seven pairs, male and female, to keep alive seed on the face of the earth.
4 For in seven more days I shall rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and I shall wipe out all the substance that I have made from up on the face of the earth."
5 And Noah did according to all that Yahweh had commanded him.
7 And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons' wives with him came ot the ark from before the waters of the flood.
10 And seven days later the waters of the flood were on the earth.
12 And there was rain on the earth, forty days and forty nights.
And Yahweh closed it for him.
17 And the flood was on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and the waters multiplied and raised the ark, and it was lifted from the earth.
18 And the waters grew strong and multiplied greatly on the earth, and the ark went on the surface of the waters.
19 And the waters grew very very strong on the earth, and they covered all the high mountains that are under all the heavens.
20 Fifteen cubits above, the waters grew stronger, and they covered the mountains.
22 Everything that had the breathing spirit of life in its nostrils, everything that was on the dry ground, died.
23 And he wiped out all the substance that was on the face of the earth, from human to beast, to creeping thing, and to bird of the heavens, and they were wiped out from the earth, and only Noah and those who were with him in the ark were left.
and the rain was restrained from the heavens.
3 And the waters receded from the earth continually,
6 And it was at the end of forty days, and Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made.
8 And he sent out a dove from him to see whether the waters had eased from the face of the earth.
9 And the dove did not find a resting place for its foot, and it returned to him to the ark, for waters were on the face of the earth and he put out his hand and took it and brought it to him to the ark.
10 And he waited seven more days, and he again sent out a dove from the ark.
11 And the dove came to him at evening time, and here was an olive leaf torn off in its mouth, and Noah knew that the waters had eased from the earth.
12 And he waited seven more days, and he sent out a dove, and it did not return to him ever again.
And Noah turned back the covering of the ark and looked, and here the face of the earth had dried
20 And Noah built an altar to Yahweh, and he took some of each of the clean beasts and of each of the clean birds, and he offered sacrifices on the altar.
21 And Yahweh smelled the pleasant smell, and Yahweh said to his heart, "I shall not again curse the ground on man's account, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from their youth, and I shall not again strike all the living as I have done.
22 All the rest of the days of the earth, seed and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease."
Comment by chiltone — May 14, 2009 @ 7:11 am
May 14th, 2009 at 7:11 am
And here's the P story alone:
9 THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF NOAH: NOAH WAS A RIGHTEOUS MAN, PERFECT IN HIS GENERATIONS. NOAH WALKED WITH GOD.
10 AND NOAH SIRED THREE SONS: SHEM, HAM AND JAPHETH.
11 AND THE EARTH WAS CORRUPTED BEFORE GOD, AND THE EARTH WAS FILLED WITH VIOLENCE.
12 AND GOD SAW THE EARTH, AND HERE IT WAS CORRUPTED, FOR ALL FLESH HAD CORRUPTED ITS WAY ON THE EARTH.
13 AND GOD SAID TO NOAH, "THE END OF ALL FLESH HAS COME BEFORE ME, FOR THE EARTH IS FILLED WITH VIOLENCE BECAUSE OF THEM, AND HERE I AM GOING TO DESTROY THEM WITH THE EARTH.
14 MAKE YOURSELF AN ARK OF GOPHER WOOD, MAKE ROOMS WITH THE ARK, AND PITCH IT OUTSIDE AND INSIDE WITH PITCH.
15 AND THIS IS HOW YOU SHALL MAKE IT: THREE HUNDRED CUBITS THE LENGTH OF THE ARK, FIFTY CUBITS ITS WIDTH, AND THIRTY CUBITS ITS HEIGHT.
16 YOU SHALL MAKE A WINDOW FOR THE ARK, AND YOU SHALL FINISH IT TO A CUBIT FROM THE TOP, AND YOU SHALL MAKE AN ENTRANCE TO THE ARK IN ITS SIDE. YOU SHALL MAKE LOWER, SECOND AND THIRD STORIES FOR IT.
17 AND HERE I AM BRINGING THE FLOOD, WATER OVER THE EARTH, TO DESTROY ALL FLESH IN WHICH IS THE BREATH OF LIFE FROM UNDER THE HEAVENS. EVERYTHING WHICH IS ON THE LAND WILL DIE.
18 AND I SHALL ESTABLISH MY COVENANT WITH YOU. AND YOU SHALL COME TO THE ARK, YOU AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR WIFE AND YOUR SON'S WIVES WITH YOU.
19 AND OF ALL THE LIVING, OF ALL FLESH, YOU SHALL BRING TWO TO THE ARK TO KEEP ALIVE WITH YOU, THEY SHALL BE MALE AND FEMALE.
20 OF THE BIRDS ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND OF THE BEASTS ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, TWO OF EACH WILL COME TO YOU TO KEEP ALIVE.
21 AND YOU, TAKE FOR YOURSELF OF ALL FOOD WHICH WILL BE EATEN AND GATHER IT TO YOU, AND IT WILL BE FOR YOU AND FOR THEM FOR FOOD."
22 AND NOAH DID ACCORDING TO ALL THAT GOD COMMAND HIM – SO HE DID.
6 AND NOAH WAS SIX HUNDRED YEARS OLD, AND THE FLOOD WAS ON THE EARTH.
8 OF THE CLEAN BEASTS AND OF THE BEASTS WHICH WERE NOT CLEAN, AND OF THE BIRDS AND OF ALL THOSE WHICH CREEP UPON THE EARTH,
9 TWO OF EACH CAME TO NOAH TO THE ARK, MALE AND FEMALE, AS GOD HAD COMMANDED NOAH.
11 IN THE SIX HUNDREDTH YEAR OF NOAH'S LIFE, IN THE SECOND MONTH, IN THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF THE MONTH, ON THIS DAY ALL THE FOUNTAINS OF THE GREAT DEEP WERE BROKEN UP, AND THE WINDOWS OF THE HEAVENS WERE OPENED.
13 IN THIS VERY DAY, NOAH AND SHEM, HAM, AND JAPHETH, THE SONS OF NOAH, AND NOAH'S WIFE AND HIS SONS' THREE WIVES WITH THEM CAME TO THE ARK.
14 THEY AND ALL THE LIVING THINGS ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND ALL THE BEASTS ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND ALL THE CREEPING THINGS THAT CREEP ON THE EARTH ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND ALL THE BIRDS ACCORDING TO THEIR KIND, AND EVERY WINGED BIRD.
15 AND THEY CAME TO NOAH TO THE ARK, TWO OF EACH, OF ALL FLESH IN WHICH IS THE BREATH OF LIFE.
16 AND THOSE WHICH CAME WERE MALE AND FEMALE, SOME OF ALL FLESH CAME, AS GOD HAD COMMANDED HIM.
21 AND ALL FLESH, THOSE THAT CREEP ON THE EARTH, THE BIRDS, THE BEASTS, AND THE WILD ANIMALS, AND ALL THE SWARMING THINGS THAT SWARM ON THE EARTH, AND ALL THE HUMANS EXPIRED.
24 AND THE WATERS GREW STRONG ON THE EARTH A HUNDRED FIFTY DAYS.
GENESIS 8:
1 AND GOD REMEMBERED NOAH AND ALL THE LIVING, AND ALL THE BEASTS THAT WERE WITH HIM IN THE ARK, AND GOD PASSSED A WIND OVER THE EARTH, AND THE WATERS WERE DECREASED.
2 AND THE FOUNTAINS OF THE DEEP AND THE WINDOWS OF THE HEAVENS WERE SHUT,
AND THE WATERS WERE ABATED AT THE END OF A HUNDRED FIFTY DAYS.
4 AND THE ARK RESTED, IN THE SEVENTH MONTH, IN THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF THE MONTH, ON THE MOUNTAINS OF ARARAT.
5 AND THE WATERS CONTINUED RECEDING UNTIL THE TENTH MONTH; IN THE TENTH MONTH, ON THE FIRST OF THE MONTH, THE TOPS OF THE MOUNTAINS APPEARED.
7 AND HE SENT OUT A RAVEN, AND IT WENT BACK AND FORTH UNTIL THE WATERS DRIED UP FROM THE EARTH.
13 AND IT WAS IN THE SIX HUNDRED AND FIRST YEAR, IN THE FIRST MONTH, ON THE FIRST OF THE MONTH, THE WATERS DRIED FROM THE EARTH
14 AND IN THE SECOND MONTH, ON THE TWENTY-SEVENTH DAY OF THE MONTH, THE EARTH DRIED UP.
15 AND GOD SPOKE TO NOAH, SAYING,
16 "GO OUT FROM THE ARK, YOU AND YOUR WIFE AND YOUR SON'S WIVES WITH YOU.
17 ALL THE LIVING THINGS THAT ARE WITH YOU, OF ALL FLESH, OF THE BIRDS, AND OF THE BEASTS, AND OF ALL THE CREEPING THINGS THAT CREEP ON THE EARTH, THAT GO OUT WITH YOU, SHALL SWARM IN THE EARTH AND BE FRUITFUL AND MULTIPLY IN THE EARTH."
18 AND NOAH AND HIS SONS AND HIS WIFE AND HIS SONS' WIVES WENT OUT.
19 ALL THE LIVING THINGS, ALL THE CREEPING THINGS AND ALL THE BIRDS, ALL THAT CREEP ON THE EARTH, BY THEIR FAMILIES, THEY WENT OUT OF THE ARK.
Comment by chiltone — May 14, 2009 @ 7:11 am
May 14th, 2009 at 7:14 am
I have to get to work now. I'll comment more tomorrow, but right now notice how the J material makes a complete story, as does the P material. Note especially how well Ezra interweaved them to make the story we're familiar with. And you should be able to see why we have some of the contradictions in Genesis too.
Comment by chiltone — May 14, 2009 @ 7:14 am
May 14th, 2009 at 7:28 am
Yeah those ancients were some idiots. They apparently thought that trees clapped and mountains sang (Isa 55:12) and the sky spoke and the sun slept in a tent (Psa 19) and that God made the earth by blowing his nose.
(Psa 18)
Of course it’s not even possible that they like all authors expressed uncommon events using common language.
No they had to be much stupider that the average 4 year old today.
Because to give them the same benefit of the doubt you give any other author would simply be out of the question.
Peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 14, 2009 @ 7:28 am
May 14th, 2009 at 10:27 am
chiltone:
Nonsense. You believe the conventional view was that celestial bodies moved across the dome and use that as justification for your argument that the author thought sun and moon stood still. A nice non-sequitur.
Comment by Bradford — May 14, 2009 @ 10:27 am
May 14th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
I was first introduced to the documentary hypothesis about 30 years ago when I was in junior high. I’ve read many books on the subject I suspect I have read this one as well although I don’t specifically recall it.
It’s a very old theory originating in mid 19th century Germany . Since it first appeared it has spawned dozens of sub theories each different and contradictory to the others. They have hypothesized up to 5 hidden sources that I know of. There are even books dedicated to the supposed theology of the supposed authors of the supposed hidden sources.
All of this is done with out the slightest bit external evidence either from archeology or textual. If you have any please post it.
This sort of snip and cut thing arises from the same mindset that gave us the Bible code and the “Q” hypothesis as well as the National Treasure movies.
I suppose it’s human nature to look for hidden messages in old texts but it would be nice for the conspiracy theorists to provide at least a little evidence.
I’m not suggesting that the author of Genesis did not use sources it’s after all what authors do. I’m only asking conspiracy theorists for evidence before they go off on a tangent of speculation.
It's possible that Genesis two is from a different source than Genesis one but you have absoulty no evidence that this is the case.
We have exactly the same chance of discovering the sources as we do of discovering the Fox’s sources for the Book of Martyrs.
To claim other wise is to display your own bias.
peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 14, 2009 @ 5:36 pm
May 14th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
After extensive research I have discovered that chiltone is not the author of this post May 14th, 2009 at 4:08 am.
He is only the complier it was actually written by two different people one a ardent fundamentalist hyper literalist and another a skeptic. I’ve taken the liberty of meticulously dissecting this document for you.
First the fundamentalist hyper literalist “F” story alone
At some time in the distant past, an author sat down with pen in hand and wrote some words that said, "… the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies." I believe that the author meant exactly what he wrote – that the sun and the moon STOOD STILL long enough for Joshua to win a battle. I believe he meant that the sun and moon stood still because the conventional view in those days was that the earth was flat and the sky was a dome stretched across it and the sun, moon, planets and stars moved across this dome once each day.
.
HE believed that the sun and moon moved across the sky, just as his eyes showed him and the people who read his book believed the same thing. THE TRUE MEANING OF THIS BIBLICAL PASSAGE IS THAT THE SUN AND MOON MOVE ACROSS THE SKY AND THAT THEY STOPPED DEAD STILL ON THIS OCCASION.
You can disagree with the Bible on this. You can have your own interpretation of what really happened. But your belief does not change what the Bible means by one iota.
The author of Joshua wrote that the sun and moon stopped. His words ended up in the Bible. The Bible's meaning, therefore, was that the sun and moon stopped in their journey across the sky.
Why do you knock Young Earth Creationists? You know, we used to have another label for YECs, a label that lasted from the first century until just a few hundred years ago. We called them Christians. (Before that we called them Jews.) Every Christian was a YEC in those days because they had no inkling that the earth had been formed any earlier than circa 4000 BC, as the Bible says.
You can't re-interpret Scripture to give it a meaning 180 degrees away from the meaning the original authors gave it. And you can't re-interpret science to make it agree with scripture. It's not that it's too much work, it's because it's immoral to tell lies about what the authors of Scripture meant by their words. Both practices are equally wrong
Now the Skeptic “S” story alone
I'm beginning to your reputation is correct and arguing with you is more or less useless, but I'll try to explain what I mean once more.
I realize that this view was incorrect and you realize that this view was incorrect, BUT THE AUTHOR OF JOSHUA WOULD HAVE DISAGREED WITH BOTH OF US
Luther did not misinterpret Joshua. He correctly interpreted the Bible's meaning: the sun and moon stopped. He used that correct interpretation as evidence against the Copernican theory. Luther was correct about the Bible, the Bible was factually incorrect about the movement of the sun and moon. Luther ended up embarassing himself and the Bible. This is what Augustine was warning about.
When evidence for a much older earth became too strong to ignore, Christians went one of two ways: Some distorted science to make it agree with Scripture. We call them YECs today. Others distorted Scripture to make it agree with Science. Both are wrong
I have to get to work now. I'll comment more tomorrow, but right now notice how the F material makes a complete story, as does the S material. Note especially how well chiltone interweaved them to make the post we're familiar with. And you should be able to see why we have some of the contradictions in chiltone’s post too.
That was fun
peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 14, 2009 @ 7:55 pm
May 15th, 2009 at 4:14 am
Bradford: "Nonsense. You believe the conventional view was that celestial bodies moved across the dome and use that as justification for your argument that the author thought sun and moon stood still. A nice non-sequitur."
Please read my argument again. I state that the conventional view of the day was that the celestial bodies moved across the dome of the sky. See Ecclesiastes 1:5 "The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose." The sun rises, crosss the sky, goes down and then somehow hurries back to the east so it can rise again the next day.
Now look at Joshua 10:11-13
"11 And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, and were in the going down to Bethhoron, that the LORD cast down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword.
12 Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day."
The sun stood still and the moon stayed. And, as Joshua 10:14 says, "And there was no day like that before it or after it …" It was a very unusual day – the sun and moon stood still.
Now if you don't think that the author of Joshua thought that the sun and moon had stood still, what do you think he meant? What possible other meaning fits his words?
Comment by chiltone — May 15, 2009 @ 4:14 am
May 15th, 2009 at 4:23 am
fifth monarchy man: "Yeah those ancients were some idiots. They apparently thought that trees clapped and mountains sang (Isa 55:12) and the sky spoke and the sun slept in a tent (Psa 19) and that God made the earth by blowing his nose. (Psa 18)"
I don't deny that the Bible sometimes uses poetic language, but that is clearly not the case in Joshua.
fmm: "Of course it’s not even possible that they like all authors expressed uncommon events using common language."
Not possible??? That's EXACTLY what the author of Joshua did! Having the sun and moon halt is extraordinarily uncommon. I've never heard of it happening anywhere else. And what language is more common than, "the sun stood still, and the moon stayed" and "So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven". Simple, common language describing a very uncommon event.
I asked Bradford what other meaning could you possibly give to the words of the author of Joshua and I ask you the same question.
Comment by chiltone — May 15, 2009 @ 4:23 am
May 15th, 2009 at 7:13 am
chiltone
How exactly do you know this?
and
How exactly in Chiltone world does the actual literal stopping of the sun and moon help the Israelites win a battle?
peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 15, 2009 @ 7:13 am
May 15th, 2009 at 7:16 am
What about a prolonged twilight condition, one where it was not hot but light enough to see your enemies this is in accordance with the observation of the hailstones and the cloud cover necessary to produce them.
The cloud cover would make actuall observation of the sun and moon impossible would it not?
peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 15, 2009 @ 7:16 am
May 15th, 2009 at 9:45 am
fmm:
I guess a rainbow is impossible too by your logic.
Comment by Raevmo — May 15, 2009 @ 9:45 am
May 15th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Why so?
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 15, 2009 @ 4:33 pm
May 15th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
chiltone:
And your point is?
Comment by Bradford — May 15, 2009 @ 8:21 pm
May 15th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
allow me to expand on my earlier comment
I believe that the book of Joshua is the inerrant word of God because God himself in the person of Jesus thought it was. However as is the case of all scripture it’s not a particular reading of the text that is inspired but the text itself.
So since I’m not a prophet or a son of a prophet all I can do is wrestle with Joshua just like I would do with any ancient text and give my best educated guess as to what I think the author was intending to convey.
Keeping in mind four facts
1) The Hebrew word that is used to say that the sun stood still often means to be silent
2) The miracle that happened that day somehow helped the Israelites in their battle to the point that they believed that Yahweh was fighting for them.
3) The phenomena in question was associated with a unprecedented hail storm.
4) the source for the story the Book of Jashar contained highly poetic language (2nd Samuel 1:18-27)
Maybe this is what happened
In the Bible (Gen 1:16) and in worldview of the Israelites the sun “ruled” the day and the moon “ruled” the night.
On this particular day however God sovereignly exercised his Devine prerogative and overruled the governing of both these heavenly bodies for the sake of his people.
He created an extended time period in which neither orb would govern, a twilight/dawn that lasted an entire day.
I live in tornado ally so I have often seen a similar phenomenon that lasted for maybe a couple of hours before or after a particularly nasty storm but I have never seen it last all day.
That would truly be an unique day in in my book.
Now imagine the reaction of Joshua and the gang when on the day of battle it was eerily and providently twilight all day and at the same time his enemy was miraculously struck down by hail stones.
Leaving his troops to only have to perform a clean up operation in the strange coolness.
All of this in the middle of the arid middle east.
Can you blame them for calling it a unique day in which Yahweh actually fought for his people?
Peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 15, 2009 @ 8:35 pm
May 15th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
actually Joshua 10:14 says
(ESV) There has been no day like it before or since, when the LORD heeded the voice of a man, for the LORD fought for Israel.
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 15, 2009 @ 8:44 pm
May 18th, 2009 at 4:31 am
fifth monarchy man: "This sort of snip and cut thing arises from the same mindset that gave us the Bible code and the “Q” hypothesis as well as the National Treasure movies."
Now you're insulting your own intelligence. The documentary hypothesis' roots go back to early attempts to discover who really wrote the Pentateuch. In the 11th century, Isaac ibn Yashush pointed out that a list of Edomite kings in Genesis 36 named kings who were born long after Moses died. He suggested Genesis was written by someone who lived long after Moses. He was called "Isaac the blunderer" for his troubles. A twelfth century rabbi named Abraham ibn Ezra said his book should be burned. Ezra himself, however, "alluded to passages that referred to Moses in the third person, used terms that Moses would not have known, described places where Moses had never been and used langauge that reflected another time and local from those of Moses." He also said, "And he who understands will keep silent."
In the 14th century, Bonfils wrote, "And this [Ezra's passages above] is evidence that this verse was written in the Torah later, and Moses did not write it…" When his book was reprinted, those passages were left out.
In the 16th century, Andreas van Maes and two Jesuit priests wrote that Moses had written the Pentateuch, but that later editors had added phrases. His book was placed on the Catholic Index of Prohibited Books. In the same century, Isaac de la Peyrere, a Calvinist, wrote that Moses was not the author and drew attention to many problematic passages. His book was banned and burned and he was arrested, forced to convert to Catholicism and made to apologize to the Pope.
In the same century, Spinoza showed that the problematic passages permeated all five books. His book was banned by Protestants and Catholics, it was placed on the Index, thirty-seven edicts were published against it and an attempt was made on his life.
Richard Simon, a Catholic priest converted from Protestantism, wrote that the core of the Pentateuch was by Moses, but additions were later made by scribes. He was expelled from his order, his books were placed on the Index, he was attack by his fellow Catholics, forty "refutations" of his book were published by protestants, and all but six copies of his book were burned. An English version was translated by John Hampden. Hampden was locked up in the Tower of London and wasn't released until he recanted.
Comparing these men's sufferings to the writer of Dembski-bait like "The Bible Code" just makes your other arguments look tacky.
fmm: "How exactly in Chiltone world does the actual literal stopping of the sun and moon help the Israelites win a battle?"
fmm: "What about a prolonged twilight condition, one where it was not hot but light enough to see your enemies this is in accordance with the observation of the hailstones and the cloud cover necessary to produce them.
The cloud cover would make actuall observation of the sun and moon impossible would it not?"
It helps them by giving them enough light to fight by so they could utterly defeat their enemies. The hailstones came before the sun stopped and if Joshua couldn't see the sun through clouds, he would not have written that it stopped.
Comment by chiltone — May 18, 2009 @ 4:31 am
May 18th, 2009 at 4:40 am
fifth monarchy man: "I believe that the book of Joshua is the inerrant word of God because God himself in the person of Jesus thought it was. However as is the case of all scripture it’s not a particular reading of the text that is inspired but the text itself."
Okay, that pretty well wraps up the argument. You and Heddle both have private versions of the Bible. You believe the book was written (in some way) by God, you (and maybe Heddle) believe it's inerrant, but it has this pesky property of not always agreeing with what you know to be true about the world.
So you both "interpret" the words to mean what you think they mean and too bad for what the author actually intended.
It's basically not worth the candle to argue with an inerrantist. They don't respect logic, knowledge or common sense. The Bible means what they want it to mean, full stop.
Comment by chiltone — May 18, 2009 @ 4:40 am
May 18th, 2009 at 7:29 am
trying to discover the author or a book is a whole diferent enterptise from trying to find hidden texts in a book don't you agree?
That might explain the sun but what about the moon?
So you are an expert now on what he would have written?
By the way here is another example of the kind of poetic language used in Joshua, this time we talking about stars fighting but they were some how seen through a thunderstorm.
Jdg 5:20-21 From heaven the stars fought, from their courses they fought against Sisera. The torrent Kishon swept them away, the ancient torrent, the torrent Kishon. March on, my soul, with might!
Actually is always agrees with what I know to be true about the world. Sometimes however it disagrees with what I think I know to be true.
Actually it’s because of knowledge and logic that I’m believe in inerrancy of scripture.
Here is the syllogism
Major premise
God is omniscient and truthful
Minor premise
God claims that the book of Joshua is inerrant
conclusion
Therefore the book of Joshua is inerrant
If you wish to claim the bible is in error all you have to do to show why the syllogism is in error. I’ll agree that fight about the meanings of obscure passages in the old testament won’t do it
peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 18, 2009 @ 7:29 am
May 18th, 2009 at 10:59 am
chiltone:
Then why devote so much of your time to arguing with inerrantists? I suspect I know the source of this sock.
Comment by Bradford — May 18, 2009 @ 10:59 am
May 19th, 2009 at 3:26 am
I don't think Heddle is an inerrantist and I've never argued with fifth monarchy man before.
Comment by chiltone — May 19, 2009 @ 3:26 am
May 19th, 2009 at 3:34 am
The biggest problem with your syllogism is the first two words of the first premise: "God is". Now that Dr. William Dembski has inadvertently proven that God does not exist, that premise is now shown to be wrong and the whole syllogism falls with it.
The minor premise also has a problem: God claims that the book of Joshua is inerrant? Where does He do this? In the Bible? Talk about your circular argument! But that's not really important after Dembski's fine work against the existence of God.
Comment by chiltone — May 19, 2009 @ 3:34 am
May 19th, 2009 at 3:37 am
By the way, the various quotations in yesterday's posting are from "Who Wrote the Bible", pages 18-21 of the paperback edition. Later documentary theorists also paid very high prices for their theories, but none that I know of were locked up in the Tower of London.
Comment by chiltone — May 19, 2009 @ 3:37 am
May 19th, 2009 at 7:20 am
I’ve met God personally and he revealed himself for all to see objectively in history in the man Jesus so I can assure you that he exists.
He does it in at least three ways none of those relies on the inerrancy of the bible, and one of which has nothing to do with the bible so circular reasoning is not used in this case.
Yes, they are subject to lucrative book deals and unquestioning adoration from folks like you.
peace
Comment by fifth monarchy man — May 19, 2009 @ 7:20 am