- "It is important to interpret Scripture so that it is true to the facts of “public knowledge” as understood by the larger world to which the Church speaks." This is a dangerous hermeneutic. Truth is not decided by majority vote. It matters little to me what the larger world accepts as true. I will not let this be my driving force in interpretation. This also brings up the larger point of how hermeneutics and scientific knowledge interact. We must understand that science doesn't say anything, scientists do. All data needs to be interpreted and depending on your philosophical worldview (atheist, christian, intelligent design, agnostic, etc...) your interpretation can shift greatly. But hermeneutics (the rules we use to interpret language) are fixed. They really do not change at all. Scientific interpretation changes all the time. Therefore, excuse me if I am not so quick to alter my solid hermeneutics based on your every changing interpretations.
- “In a time when we’ve traced out in the DNA our shared genetic heritage with primates and other mammals, it is not longer possible for informed readers to interpret the book of Genesis as straightforward history.” This "science-trumps-all" mentality is nothing more than an Enlightenment worldview. That is, a worldview that says reason trumps revelation, the natural overcomes the supernatural, and science reduces God to a passive actor in it. This quote is chalk full of false premises presented as fact. You can see, though, from this quote the author's philosophy creeping into the back door and stabbing his hermeneutic in the back.
- "The Bible can show historical error or theological confusion and still be the Word of God." How can a Bible believing person accept this? Who or what, then, gets to be the standard to tell us what is error and what is the Word of God? What Satan has done through this sort of mentality is allowed each person to become their own Bible. If we don't like a part of Scripture we can just put it into the wood chipper of "public knowledge" and goodbye to that hard to life doctrine.
- “Scripture is not a room filled with clairvoyant theologians who have the same ideas and agree on every point. It is better understood as a room of wise elders, each an invited guest because of his unique voice and relation to God…When we read Scripture well, we listen in on the conversations of these elders, and, in conversation with other readers, seek as best we can to understand God’s voice. It is through this communal reading experience that God points us to his one and only solution for our broken condition: Jesus Christ.” At this point I've come to wonder if this author has gone through his Bible with a liberal highlighter, aka a black sharpie. Listen to the Holy Words of God on this matter, "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2Peter 1:20-21) The ultimate source of all Scripture is God, the means by which He communicated it to us is men moved by the Holy Spirit. According to this author we are to suppose that God doesn't agree with Himself. But the Scriptures are clear. The Bible claims to be from God and God cannot contradict Himself or anything that is true (cf. Mark 13:11; Acts 28:24-26). Secondly, you can't separate Jesus from doctrine. The only Jesus that comes to us comes clothed in the Apostle's doctrine. How do you know that Jesus is the only solution? Because the Apostles told you. If you can't trust them on other things then why should we trust them on this point?
I just finished reading a book on 3 different views of Genesis. One of the chapters is presented from a man who believes that Genesis contains Myth & Legend. I want to present some of his major points and show my counterpoints to his argument for I do not believe there is myth and/or legend in Genesis. The points of the author will be in bold
I’m Billy Dyer a Teacher and Preacher of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This is my blog page. It is focused on “coffee table apologetics”..... continue reading >>