This is somewhat of a rambling post, written over a few days attempting to coalesce some of my thoughts from another Bible study I decided to participate in at our church.
This past week we had our first meeting, discussing sections of Genesis that deal with creation and what that means for us, as humans and stewards. Again, as I mentioned in posts here and here, I am the sole person in the class who described being in awe at the natural world by learning about it. In fact, in response to a direct inquiry about what gives you an appreciation for our world/universe, my answer was directly tied to the knowledge I have gained about the universe in the last year, and that would be its particularity. How exact everything is. It still amazes me that if the moon was not locked into our planet, we would rotate so quickly our planet would wobble on its axis and have a day of only 6 hours, as compared to 24 hours. The moon's counteracting gravitational force is that important to our stability. How different would life be (if any existed) without that force? Those facts amaze me. Those facts make me experience a humility and connectedness with the universe at large that is as spiritual as it gets for me. I find that I am often alone in such expressions, but I can't deny the sense of genuine wonder and awe such knowledge brings forth in me.
This past week we had our first meeting, discussing sections of Genesis that deal with creation and what that means for us, as humans and stewards. Again, as I mentioned in posts here and here, I am the sole person in the class who described being in awe at the natural world by learning about it. In fact, in response to a direct inquiry about what gives you an appreciation for our world/universe, my answer was directly tied to the knowledge I have gained about the universe in the last year, and that would be its particularity. How exact everything is. It still amazes me that if the moon was not locked into our planet, we would rotate so quickly our planet would wobble on its axis and have a day of only 6 hours, as compared to 24 hours. The moon's counteracting gravitational force is that important to our stability. How different would life be (if any existed) without that force? Those facts amaze me. Those facts make me experience a humility and connectedness with the universe at large that is as spiritual as it gets for me. I find that I am often alone in such expressions, but I can't deny the sense of genuine wonder and awe such knowledge brings forth in me.
At another point during our session, an exchange occurred that also shows a....disconnect, maybe (not sure of the right word) between myself and others and how we come to view the Bible, its origin, and its veracity. For one reason or another, we had jumped ahead to the story of Noah's Ark and the Flood (which, interestingly enough, is in our reading for the coming week). I was asked a question (again, I can't exactly remember, but my response was, referring to the flood, "because I don't believe that happened." Several individuals immediately responded, "Ohhhhhhh." My peculiar obsessiveness has been replaying that in my head and I can't still figure out if it was an expression of understanding (although not agreement), surprise, disagreement, or something else.
Regardless, as I realize that it may be something that I think about and no one else does, it represents a challenge of sorts. It has never occurred to me to take the flood story literally. Never. Many people do. And a challenge to the literal veracity of that story can be interpreted as a challenge to the very underpinnings of their faith, the inerrancy of the Bible. This is the disconnect I mentioned previously. The challenge, at least from my perspective, is to continue to be honest with the individuals in the class about what I know and believe, and have it be a challenge to their faith in the respect that they confront the parts that are not necessary, but not a challenge that causes them to be defensive.
Specifically, as to the flood issue. There is no evidence that a worldwide flood ever occurred, especially not during human history. The fact that many Mesopotamian cultures have flood stories indicates that there might have been some type of localized or regional flooding event that these various peoples and cultures experienced. This knowledge does not have to be seen as challenging anything unless someone believes that the Bible contains historical and scientific truth in addition to spiritual truth. For me, it is easy to view the Bible as one of many documents that contain attempts at understanding the reality of our existence and our spirituality. However, I have increasingly encountered individuals who the Bible is truth about all that it contains, thus making it a source of historical truth, among other things. As such, stating that a worldwide flood never happened during human history to wipe out most of mankind, is not simply a rejection of a historical myth (as it is for me), but a rejection of the very word of God. I am starting to digress here, but my main point here is that there is no reason why a rejection of a common flood myth should be cause for concern to one's faith. Whether or not a flood happened is only relevant if one is placing just as much faith in the book of the Bible as they are in their particular conception of God or the Divine.
Anyway, back to the idea of the challenge of presenting ideas in a non-confrontational way. One of the difficult things for me to remember at times is that people are generally very uncomfortable discussing these types of questions and ideas in great detail. Often, a class like this is the first they have heard any idea challenging or presenting a different interpretation of the Bible, of faith, of God. For me, such conversation is, truly, as natural as discussing sports or the weather. I grew up discussing these ideas with my Dad around the dinner table. I was constantly exposed to religious and philosophical ideas through schooling at a Catholic middle school and high school. I studied philosophy during college out of pure interest, and had friends that who would routinely engage in philosophical and religious discussions. This familiarity with the topic has allowed me to be open to explore and consider most any idea, to discuss the depths of it. But it also results in forgetting that the people I am discussing with now may have never discussed any of these issues; they may have never heard of Higher Criticism of the Bible; the debates concerning the duality (or non-duality) of mind and body; the problem of evil and its myriad of responses; definitions and proofs for the existence of God; or even free will versus predestination. These may represent very new, and potentially challenging, discussions for people. And for me, their discussions I have had countless times.
So, the challenge is to relay the past knowledge in the non-confrontational way. The challenge is also to respect the new discussion; to search keenly and inquisitively for new arguments, new thoughts, new ideas; to avoid the trap of thinking that nothing new can be offered. As it has been said, great challenges present great opportunities. And as we will be reading the story of the Flood and Noah's Ark for next week's class (in addition to other things), I'm sure the opportunities will continue to present themselves.
Anyway, back to the idea of the challenge of presenting ideas in a non-confrontational way. One of the difficult things for me to remember at times is that people are generally very uncomfortable discussing these types of questions and ideas in great detail. Often, a class like this is the first they have heard any idea challenging or presenting a different interpretation of the Bible, of faith, of God. For me, such conversation is, truly, as natural as discussing sports or the weather. I grew up discussing these ideas with my Dad around the dinner table. I was constantly exposed to religious and philosophical ideas through schooling at a Catholic middle school and high school. I studied philosophy during college out of pure interest, and had friends that who would routinely engage in philosophical and religious discussions. This familiarity with the topic has allowed me to be open to explore and consider most any idea, to discuss the depths of it. But it also results in forgetting that the people I am discussing with now may have never discussed any of these issues; they may have never heard of Higher Criticism of the Bible; the debates concerning the duality (or non-duality) of mind and body; the problem of evil and its myriad of responses; definitions and proofs for the existence of God; or even free will versus predestination. These may represent very new, and potentially challenging, discussions for people. And for me, their discussions I have had countless times.
So, the challenge is to relay the past knowledge in the non-confrontational way. The challenge is also to respect the new discussion; to search keenly and inquisitively for new arguments, new thoughts, new ideas; to avoid the trap of thinking that nothing new can be offered. As it has been said, great challenges present great opportunities. And as we will be reading the story of the Flood and Noah's Ark for next week's class (in addition to other things), I'm sure the opportunities will continue to present themselves.
0 comments:
Post a Comment