November 10, 2011

food for thought.

i have been thinking a lot lately about how we approach, read & "accept" the bible
do we take it at face value?
do we interpret it?
do we pick & choose what to believe?
do we pick & choose what is "literal" and what is "symbolic" or a "suggestion"?

I am taking a course at CMU this semester called "The Problem of Evil in a Biblical Perspective" but really it should be called, the "class of questions, debates and opinions" and that is both a good thing and a frustrating thing. I realize that it is quite hard to definite terms like "evil" because it can be quite subjective, also, some things don't seem "evil" when compared to something else that is much worse. Also, there are so many different circumstances, situations and opinions to consider. For me, what ever is not from God is evil. God created EVERYTHING. but sin.. that is not God. But then we run into the question, well, what defines SIN. it is strange how something can be so simple yet so complicated.

I think it is good to learn things, and to have debates and to experience things that challenge your faith. it helps make it stronger and helps me to really figure out exactly what I believe. But, at the same time, I really struggle when having conversations with other Christians, who take the bible to mean something totally different than I do. For example, I realized this week (in more than one situation) that people believe that Genesis is a myth. a nice story, but not truth. and not only that, but some people also think that Job is a myth and that Jonah is a myth. what? that just doesn't sit right with me.

genesis starts with "in the beginning" it doesn't start with "heres a nice story" or "once upon a time". This is God's word, and if we can pick and choose which books of the bible are "true" and which are "myths", then what makes us think that any of it is true?

my teacher explained in class that in some ways, Genesis is a "myth" (to which my jaw dropped open and I was already mentally preparing my email to the advisory board at the school..) but then he went on. In a "literary" way, yes, Genesis is a myth. Because a "myth" used to mean a story that was used to make a point, as in, the point was God created everything, but Genesis doesn't include a detailed time line (for instance, how long was adam in the garden before he actually met Eve? how long did it take him to name all the animals? how many years passed before A & E ate the apple? where did the other people come from - cain's wife - etc.) the details aren't the important part. so yes, in a literary term, Genesis can fall under the category of myth. But, now a days, myth is used for "mythology" or stories, or untrue fables. and some people are lumping that together with how they view Genesis. I just really struggle with all of that from other Christians. We are reading the same book, we are serving the same God... how do we come to such a different conclusion?

I also had a conversation with a girl named Kat this week.. and she & I began talking about Genesis (through no prompting of my own.. seems like God has just been bringing it all up in different conversations around me) and she made a point that I had never thought about before. In genesis it says that God took Adam and placed him in the garden, to work in it and care for it. But, "working" in that sense was not the same as the way we "work" now (one of the differences since the fall). Kat pointed out to me that Adam was in charge of tending to this place of meeting, this holy sanctuary so to speak. Adam was in charge of caring for it, because that is where God came and met with him. Not only met with him, but WALKED with him through the garden. God put Adam there to care for their meeting place, their hang out. how cool, that Adam has such an intimate relationship with God - they just hung out together! I love it. And, through my own experience of relationship with God.. and how real it is, it makes it even harder for me to believe that God "made up" those intimate relationships with Adam and Job.

Food for thought I suppose...

No comments: