 |
|
|
"something will happen that brings about the war which will end the world as we know it... There will be a vicious cycle of storms and earthquakes that lead to the final battle the world has awaited."
-- Dotson Meade, 1999
|
|
| |
News: The Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of Creation
Posted on Wednesday, April 02 @ 10:44:18 PDT by Virgil |
|
by Davis A. Young
A common impression exists among lay Christians and many non-Christians that the church interpreted Genesis 1-3 literally until the last two centuries. This allegedly traditional rendering includes the idea that God created the cosmos over a span of six ordinary 24-hour days, that there was no death in the world until the fall of Adam, and that at the time of the fall God introduced many other unpleasantries into the world-order as a punishment for sin. Included is the notion that thorns and thistles were not part of the original creation.
Moreover, one encounters the suggestion that the church firmly held to these traditional ideas until the early 19th century, when geology proposed the concepts of an old earth and death before the appearance of man. The conclusion for many evangelicals is that these traditional ideas are the plain teaching of Scripture, and that attempts to avoid these plain teachings arose because of an unholy desire to accommodate biblical teaching to the dictates of an anti-Christian modern science.
That such a reading of church history is simplistic becomes clear when we consider the views of Augustine, the church's greatest theologian between Paul and Aquinas, on Genesis 1-3. Although we can gain an inkling of Augustine's approach to Genesis 1-3 from scattered comments in Confessions and The City of God, deeper insight is now possible for a wide audience with the recent publication of a fresh English translation of his great work, On the Literal Meaning of Genesis.' The few studies of Augustine's view of creation that are based on the Latin text are not widely accessible. It is my judgment that anyone seriously interested in the Genesis-science discussion should take the time to study this new translation. It is full of surprises. I wish to make a few observations about Augustine's general approach and his specific interpretations of the text of Genesis 1-3.
Click here to read the entire article
|
| |
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Relationship view (Score: 1)
 by Barry on Wednesday, April 02 @ 13:10:12 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Hi Everyone.
I posted this somewhere else but thought I might try it here.
Have we really explored all of the alternatives?
For example, I think I see just a bit of a bias when I here Genesis 1 as not being "physical creation".
Why would we call "general creation" or "universal creation", "physical" creation.
The Hebrews did not really think like that. Generally speaking they thought in terms of relationship.
The Hebrews could describe a house being built more in terms of a "home" formed.
They could describe the forming of the different rooms as living areas. They could speak of the relationship "of the whole matter".
That being said, where and when the Bible speaks of General creation it could speak in the same basic terms as what has been called covenant creation.
The question then involves these points:
1) Does the Bible ever speak about God as General or Universal Creator and Maker?
If so where and when?
2) If God is the creator of the General creation and the Bible does speak of it would that General creation itself hold "promise"? If so would not General creation be like covenant?
3) If number 2 is "yes" then is it possible that what has been called covenant creation, is actually a type of "sub-set" or "micro cosmos" for the outworking of "promise" and "promises".
It seems to me that we may be able to frame the whole matter in a God of relationship.
While many may disagree with such an approach I would like to hear your answer to "number one" and investigate from there if "relationship" is not at the foundation of the texts given in support of Universal creation as being in the scriptures.
Blessings
Barry
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by JL on Wednesday, April 02 @ 16:20:05 PDT
- by Barry on Thursday, April 03 @ 05:53:12 PDT
- by Starlight on Thursday, April 03 @ 08:00:22 PDT
- by JL on Thursday, April 03 @ 08:25:47 PDT
- by tom-g on Thursday, April 03 @ 11:35:28 PDT
- by MiddleKnowledge on Thursday, April 03 @ 13:41:12 PDT
- by Barry on Friday, April 04 @ 05:46:43 PDT
- by amie on Friday, April 04 @ 11:27:06 PDT
- by JL on Saturday, April 05 @ 17:33:34 PDT
Re: The Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of Creation (Score: 1)
by MichaelB on Saturday, April 05 @ 22:53:25 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | JL wirtes:
Covenant creation is all about relationships, specifically the creation of God's relationship with man.
Yes - and - apparently covenantal relationship with plants and animals too...???
I already showed that history / church fathers / Josephus etc. does not support this view.
*** If Genesis 1 and 2 is about the first "covenantal man" then it is about the creation of the first "covenantal plants, and covenantal animals" too. If it is about actual creation of animals and plants, then animals and plants did not exist prior to this, and therefore man did not either ***
Genesis 1
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 11 Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. 26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." 29 Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so.
Genesis 2
5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
*** If the plants and animals are actually people, then Noah was told to sacrifice and eat people ***
Genesis 8
15 Then God said to Noah, 16 "Come out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and their wives. 17 Bring out every kind of living creature that is with you—the birds, the animals, and all the creatures that move along the ground—so they can multiply on the earth and be fruitful and increase in number upon it." 18 So Noah came out, together with his sons and his wife and his sons' wives. 19 All the animals and all the creatures that move along the ground and all the birds—everything that moves on the earth—came out of the ark, one kind after another. 20 Then Noah built an altar to the LORD and, taking some of all the clean animals and clean birds, he sacrificed burnt offerings on it. 21 The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: "Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done.
Genesis 9
2 The fear and dread of you will fall upon all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air, upon every creature that moves along the ground, and upon all the fish of the sea; they are given into your hands. 3 Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by JL on Sunday, April 06 @ 09:44:42 PDT
- by tom-g on Sunday, April 06 @ 10:53:15 PDT
- by JL on Sunday, April 06 @ 14:58:22 PDT
- by MichaelB on Sunday, April 06 @ 15:04:53 PDT
Re: The Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of Creation (Score: 1)
by Sam on Tuesday, April 08 @ 13:38:42 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | good article:http://www.creationism.org/articles/EarlyChurchLit6Days.htm
Sam |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by JL on Tuesday, April 08 @ 15:53:01 PDT
- by Starlight on Tuesday, April 08 @ 17:11:25 PDT
- by KingNeb on Tuesday, April 08 @ 18:09:47 PDT
- by mazuur on Tuesday, April 08 @ 17:19:23 PDT
- by MiddleKnowledge on Tuesday, April 08 @ 17:57:32 PDT
- by KingNeb on Tuesday, April 08 @ 18:21:34 PDT
- by KingNeb on Tuesday, April 08 @ 18:23:49 PDT
- by mazuur on Tuesday, April 08 @ 18:40:50 PDT
- by MiddleKnowledge on Tuesday, April 08 @ 18:58:23 PDT
- by KingNeb on Tuesday, April 08 @ 19:05:02 PDT
- by mazuur on Tuesday, April 08 @ 19:17:33 PDT
- by MiddleKnowledge on Tuesday, April 08 @ 19:28:00 PDT
- by KingNeb on Tuesday, April 08 @ 20:49:42 PDT
- by KingNeb on Tuesday, April 08 @ 18:11:31 PDT
Re: The Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of Creation (Score: 1)
by Sam on Wednesday, April 09 @ 00:05:51 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I can't believe that I am having to state this. Tim and Jeff have said that the ECF DID NOT TEACH YEC. Here's some quotes saying they DID. therefore, tim and jeff are WRONG. Simple. Understand? Get it? ellen g. white did not INVENT YEC...get that? See? Comprhende? That's my only point.....YEC DID NOT BEGIN IN THE 19th CENTURY....Good God!
Sam |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by mazuur on Wednesday, April 09 @ 06:07:38 PDT
- by flannery0 on Wednesday, April 09 @ 06:32:00 PDT
- by MiddleKnowledge on Wednesday, April 09 @ 07:06:45 PDT
- by tom-g on Wednesday, April 09 @ 09:52:04 PDT
- by mazuur on Wednesday, April 09 @ 07:31:55 PDT
- by KingNeb on Wednesday, April 09 @ 12:42:01 PDT
- by KingNeb on Wednesday, April 09 @ 10:34:24 PDT
Re: The Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of Creation (Score: 1)
 by Windpressor (Giddi_one) on Wednesday, April 09 @ 03:15:34 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | *********
Evolutionists are derided for story-building on human descent and missing links from as little as a pig's tooth.
Likewise, creationist expositors build doctrinaire scenarios from speculations on the brevities of biblical expressions.
=========
(from the linked article)
General Comments About Interpretation:
#4
" Augustine is particularly emphatic that we ought not to make absurd statements about what the Bible says when such statements flatly contradict what people already know from other reliable sources. We ought not to rigidly and dogmatically commit Scripture to interpretations that can easily be shown to he f4ise(sic) on the basis of physical evidence."
"It seems to me that the following lengthy quotation cannot be heard enough because it is so terribly relevant to the present discussion about Genesis and earth history. Augustine says:
** ... Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions ... For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. (pp. 42-43)**
"It seems to me that some of the young-earth, flood geology proponents of this century exemplify those whom Augustine had in mind. One can only guess at the damage done to evangelistic efforts among scientists by the persistent claims of Christians that the Bible teaches a young earth and a global deluge."
...
...
========= (end quote)
Consider the brevity of the creation account and the assumption that it is about ramping up an entire universe from zero to cosmic expanse in ... a matter of days.
Now compare another account about the brevity of text that records a matter much smaller in scope than a vast cosmos. The authors at the "Accuracy in Genesis" site similarly appeal to honesty about the brevity factor in the focal summary of the Tower of Babel incidentals --
============(quote)
...
...
"The Scriptural Hebrew account is so brief that it is difficult to discern the full story. Many have implied that immediately the workers on the tower were unable to understand each other and quit work in confusion. When in fact, there is no mention of the time factor and the method of "confounding" the languages is also not discussed. ...
...
...
"So in summary, we just don't fully understand the nature of the events that caused the "confounding" and the scattering, and over what time period it all took place, the Scriptural record is just too brief! It would seem most likely that it was a long term process and that it occurred in Anatolia !"
Babel, from whence came All Languages?
============= (end quote)
It would seem that it is basic human nature to attempt comprehension through stretching imagination by reading into perception, of texts or phenomena, more than is actually there.
..................... |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by flannery0 on Wednesday, April 09 @ 05:20:59 PDT
Re: The Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of Creation (Score: 1)
by Sam on Wednesday, April 09 @ 09:46:59 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Rich,
Yea, I am bent out of shape because everytime we make a point someone twists it to such a conclusion that was never meant....and it happened again.
Tim now admits that YEC was taught before Ellen G. White. That was a huge part of their book. Now, Tim wants this to be that I am arguing that YEC was taught in the early church, therefore, it is the truth. I never argued that. The inability to stay focused on the argument amazes me. Then, Tami jumps in with a completely different thing altogether....
The ONLY thing I argued for and have shown (thanks to Mike Bennett) is that Ellen G. White did not invent YEC. Period. End of story. Tim now admits this.
Now, my pointing this out does not PROVE YEC in the slightest. It merely shows that YEC was around long, long before Ellen G. White and that IT IS NOT A LOONY TUNE position as some make it out to be. It is a VIABLE position, one that should be tolerated and treated with respect. That has been at the forefront for me all along and I will address this further at the conference (apart from my lectures).
Rich, it has NOTHING to do with Tim, personally. Max King is a card carrying Arminian, Church of Christ - I am a staunch, Determinist, Calvinist. Just because Max is an Arminian does not make me interested in Arminianism in the slightest. It's about theology and truth, not people and personalities. Stay focused and stop trying to psychoanalyse me - like, "YEC is so stupid, that the only reason Sam adheres to it is because he does not like Tim and Jeff." Or something lame along those lines....
Can't wait to get to the conference....a lot of this stuff is going to be straightened out.
Sam |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by KingNeb on Wednesday, April 09 @ 10:38:23 PDT
- by mazuur on Wednesday, April 09 @ 11:24:35 PDT
- by KingNeb on Wednesday, April 09 @ 11:54:18 PDT
Re: The Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of Creation (Score: 1)
 by extremestan on Saturday, April 19 @ 17:24:43 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Augustine was full of wisdom, and especially on this matter. His reluctance for anyone to certainly commit to a single interpretation was, in retrospect, almost prophetic, for we see with observation through technology that, if taken at face value, the Creation account is false. The solution, many are discovering, is to instead take it at it was intended -- an apocalyptic expression of how and why God interacts with the universe and man in particular.
How? Procedurally; foundation, then subsequent fulfillment. Why? For the benefit of man. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by MiddleKnowledge on Saturday, April 19 @ 20:47:14 PDT
- by tom-g on Sunday, April 20 @ 08:35:02 PDT
- by extremestan on Sunday, April 20 @ 10:51:35 PDT
| 
|
