Noah's Ark in Kentucky

[E4 No More]

8 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Something I've pondered a lot over the last few years is what if one day we get the chance to ask God all of those big questions, and the response we get it, "oh, you just weren't created to understand that."

I think that one would be overwhelmed with their situation to where they wouldn't even ask those kind of questions. He does promise that He has things in store for us that we can't even imagine.

God does say that, to paraphrase, we must have a child-like faith. Children accept what they are told by their parents. I've thought that the science versus God argument was irrelevant. Science tries to explain reality whereas God defines it.

[MacGyver]

Filter the first chapter of Genesis against the way the ancient Israelites understood their universe:

Then filter that against our post-Copernican understanding of the universe with the earth orbiting around the sun.

How does Genesis address the ancient Israelites, medieval people before 1543, and us today? Each of our cosmologies is vastly different. But yet, God still speaks to us.  

Looking at our understanding of the universe - and knowing how other peoples through time have understood it - I'm left to surmise that maybe it's in the story.

But, I also try to read the story like my children do - and not get so hung up on things.  

[peejman]

18 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

I very much believe the whole thing. I am just willing to look at it as the story of God's people - and not necessarily have to have it be a scientific text.

I might even go further to say that I'm willing to believe in divine revelation even when human authors, translators, preachers, and readers are imperfect.

For example - take the King James Bible that is generally revered by the most conservative traditions.  Those traditions that still regularly use it do so because they believe that it is the "purest" English translation. Modern vernacular arguments aside - did you know that the original 1611 version of the King James included several books of the Apocrypha? In fact every version up until 1666 did - and they were included in most versions up through 1885. They were already debated at the time.  Jerome labels them as such in the 4th century - even though they were in the Jewish Septuagint. Really he keeps them because St. Augustin talks him into it.  Post-reformation, they're really removed (despite a big war being fought) because the protestants would really like to appear less Catholic. There's a lot more here - and it's an interesting bit of history I recommend - but there are some pieces not in most Bibles today because one tradition wanted to look less like another tradition.

What do we do with that?

All of our translations are problematic.  The best translators are upfront about the decisions they make and why they've made them.  But, they're admitting that their translation of the text is imperfect because of the lack of ability to express ancient languages across into something accessible by the reader.

Does God still speak to us through imperfect translations?

What about through imperfect understandings of ideas?

I read an article the other day that made a compelling case for needing a second person plural in our translations - basically the Bible needs "y'all" and "all y'all" because we don't have the words in English do describe a Greek plural you.  As such, we mistake "you" in some cases to speak to us individually when we should be reading it  "y'all" to speak to us as a community.

I guess I say all of this to say that I can continue to believe without a full understanding - and even an imperfect one.

I pray that God will be graceful with all of us...

 

 

One guy in my Sunday school class has an old family 1611 Bible. He says it's really interesting, and really difficult to read.  I'd like to learn Greek and read an original translation. 

Makes me wonder if a modern language translation other than English would be better/easier/clearer? English seems to have a limited vocabulary compared to other languages. 

[peejman]

6 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Filter the first chapter of Genesis against the way the ancient Israelites understood their universe:

Then filter that against our post-Copernican understanding of the universe with the earth orbiting around the sun.

Was Genesis have to say to the ancient Israelites, to medieval people before 1543, and to us today? Each of our cosmologies is vastly different. But, God still speaks to us.  

Looking at our understanding of the universe - and knowing how other peoples through time have understood it - I'm left to surmise that maybe it's in the story.

But, I also try to read the story like my children do - and not get so hung up on things.  

True. We have to filter our interpretation with the knowledge that the already know "the rest of the story". Which isn't to say we know it all, just that we have the New Testament. 

[MacGyver]

To bring this down a level, I was going through the mail at church on Wednesday evening and there was a flier for the Ark/Creation Museum in the stack.  Greg, there weren't any coupons - or I would have saved them for you

Rather they were advertising for group tours at Christmas.

Now, mind you, I come from a conservative tradition - church of Christ. While my practice has changed somewhat from that of my ancestors - I still worship in that tradition, and the faith of my family before me has been absolutely formative in my faith.

As such - I did not have a bucket to put this flier in, as the things it was advertising simply wouldn't have mixed in the conservative tradition of my upbringing.

I give you, Christmas Village at the Ark Encounter:

Christmas trees, zip lines, ice skating, and a wonderland of lights.  My ancestors may have lost their minds over something like this. I'll admit that I don't quite have a bucket to put this in - but find myself a little less than comfortable with this whole "commercialization of Christmas" sort of thing from a group that I would have thought more conservative than me.

But, if you see the above - and you're like "heck yeah, that's better than going to see the lights at Opryland for the eighth year in a row," here's a link:

https://arkencounter.com/christmas/

It's even free after 5:00.

[GlockSpock]

12 hours ago, Dirtshooter said:

Greg I will have to ask my SIL who is a Baptist preacher with a doctorate in theology and get back to you whenever I get an answer. My Daughter and family went last year and really liked it.

SIL = Sister-in-Law = Baptist Preacher?

That's new. Southern Baptist?

11 hours ago, MacGyver said:

I very much believe the whole thing. I am just willing to look at it as the story of God's people - and not necessarily have to have it be a scientific text.

I might even go further to say that I'm willing to believe in divine revelation even when human authors, translators, preachers, and readers are imperfect.

For example - take the King James Bible that is generally revered by the most conservative traditions.  Those traditions that still regularly use it do so because they believe that it is the "purest" English translation. Modern vernacular arguments aside - did you know that the original 1611 version of the King James included several books of the Apocrypha? In fact every version up until 1666 did - and they were included in most versions up through 1885. They were already debated at the time.  Jerome labels them as such in the 4th century - even though they were in the Jewish Septuagint. Really he keeps them because St. Augustin talks him into it.  Post-reformation, they're really removed (despite a big war being fought) because the protestants would really like to appear less Catholic. There's a lot more here - and it's an interesting bit of history I recommend - but there are some pieces not in most Bibles today because one tradition wanted to look less like another tradition.

What do we do with that?

All of our translations are problematic.  The best translators are upfront about the decisions they make and why they've made them.  But, they're admitting that their translation of the text is imperfect because of the lack of ability to express ancient languages across into something accessible by the reader.

Does God still speak to us through imperfect translations?

What about through imperfect understandings of ideas?

I read an article the other day that made a compelling case for needing a second person plural in our translations - basically the Bible needs "y'all" and "all y'all" because we don't have the words in English do describe a Greek plural "you."  As such, we mistake "you" in some cases to speak to us individually when we should be reading it  "y'all" to speak to us as a community.

I guess I say all of this to say that I can continue to believe without a full understanding - and even an imperfect one.

I pray that God will be graceful with all of us...

 

 

This is a very good comment. I've researched a lot of this stuff and looked through some of the books of the Apocrypha for fun. I honestly wasn't sure whether or not to let them influence me so I mostly just treated it as an enjoyable thing to do and leave it at that. I however did not realize some of them were in the 1611...that's not something you typically here preached from the KJV Only crowd.

Something I really, really try to keep in mind is the following. Is the The Word (Bible) precious? Of course it is. But consider different time periods throughout history when the bible in any form did not exist or was not available. Then ask yourself whether it was possible to lead someone to salvation and continue and grow in the faith. 

I also try to keep all of that in mind regarding foolish arguments. I like doctrine. I personally hold doctrine to be important, although there are many aspects of it that I'm unsure of. Some folks seem to adhere to the belief that if your doctrine isn't 100% correct then the gift of salvation is not yours for the taking. I then try to consider what it would have been like to be a disciple or live in that time. They had faith, but no real structure in the sense that we have today. And although they had problems, just like we do today, they did continue the faith.

11 hours ago, MacGyver said:

Filter the first chapter of Genesis against the way the ancient Israelites understood their universe:

Then filter that against our post-Copernican understanding of the universe with the earth orbiting around the sun.

How does Genesis address the ancient Israelites, medieval people before 1543, and us today? Each of our cosmologies is vastly different. But yet, God still speaks to us.  

Looking at our understanding of the universe - and knowing how other peoples through time have understood it - I'm left to surmise that maybe it's in the story.

But, I also try to read the story like my children do - and not get so hung up on things.  

Or you could simply take one or two verses from the Bible and consider them 100%, infallible, God inspired proof that the earth is flat. Hey, why not?

This part of my comment is in cheek.

10 hours ago, MacGyver said:

To bring this down a level, I was going through the mail at church on Wednesday evening and there was a flier for the Ark/Creation Museum in the stack.  Greg, there weren't any coupons - or I would have saved them for you

Rather they were advertising for group tours at Christmas.

Now, mind you, I come from a conservative tradition - church of Christ. While my practice has changed somewhat from that of my ancestors - I still worship in that tradition, and the faith of my family before me has been absolutely formative in my faith.

As such - I did not have a bucket to put this flier in, as the things it was advertising simply wouldn't have mixed in the conservative tradition of my upbringing.

I give you, Christmas Village at the Ark Encounter:

Christmas trees, zip lines, ice skating, and a wonderland of lights.  My ancestors may have lost their minds over something like this. I'll admit that I don't quite have a bucket to put this in - but find myself a little less than comfortable with this whole "commercialization of Christmas" sort of thing from a group that I would have thought more conservative than me.

But, if you see the above - and you're like "heck yeah, that's better than going to see the lights at Opryland for the eighth year in a row," here's a link:

https://arkencounter.com/christmas/

It's even free after 5:00.

I view things like this as generally a Christian or religious themed capitalistic ploy. Maybe the owners/creators of this entire thing had/have good intentions. To some, all things are innocent and then to others, Christmas trees themselves are a sign you are a pagan. This bothers me less than a lot. Every time I see someone selling goods of any kind in a church or church related event, I like to imagine Jesus pulling out his whip and turning tables over. 

[Chucktshoes]

@GlockSpock SIL = Son In Law. The SBC still doesn’t ordain women as far as I know, so no women preachers, but maybe a little Pauly?

[MacGyver]

I just found it a weird juxtaposition that I didn’t expect at all when I opened the mail.  

They can put red noses on the pair of reindeer and take pictures with Santa on the forecastle of the Ark for all it affects me.  

It’s just interesting that on one hand you have a group that goes so far as to sponsor scientists to “prove” young earth theory. But, on the other hand you’ve got a giant Christmas village...

My kids have been.  I asked them earlier what their favorite part about it was, and they all said riding the camels.  If I was close by and had some time, I’d check it out. 

 

[MacGyver]

Off topic - but if you ever get the chance to parse through the mail that comes to your church, you should.  

Truthfully, I regard the above flyer as “senior ministry is hard and it’s something not many feel called to do.  If they like Branson, they’ll like this”

But, some of the mailers that come through are truly bizarre.