Today, on Facebook Nathanael and I started talking about this article. Near the end he wonders what Dr. Clam would think. So I decided to copy our conversation over and hopefully continue it here. It has been copied in total and unedited. This post has been edited to add the new Category of Synod which I’ll be using for these debates. Join in if you like.
Winston Inabox, perhaps why you wept at their last live show in Japan was because this is Bono, the Edge and Larry Mullen Jr’s context when they dream about a concert?
It’s certainly interesting to read how Christians justify the unreconcilable parts of their book. For Bono the Gospels paint a picture of demanding love, but the Old Testament is viewed as an action movie. The journey from a stern father to loving friend is also… quaint. The god of the OT killed thousands, the god of the NT provides warmth, comfort and a demanding love. The only way it can be all fit together is to paper over the divisions with metaphor.
I guess that’s one of the reasons I don’t see it at all comparable to science, and don’t get any comfort from it. In science one can’t just ignore the data that doesn’t fit, or make up a story to explain it away. And that’s what Bono does here, he makes his own version of the bible that fits with what he needs to make him comfortable. Assuming the OT to be true, then the Holy Spirit is killing real children in the 10th plague so that others may be freed. That’s pretty hard to reconcile even with a pretty story. Unless it is just a story…
There’s actually a lot more than metaphor to fill in the divisions, but that’s a whole nother line of discussion.
Suffice it say that we all make our Gods (idols) in our own image but they actually make us like them.
Whatever is used doesn’t alter my above assessment.
If the stories are true, they’re atrocities.
If they’re not true, they’re just stories.
You can’t have it both ways. Well, you can, and obviously do. But if they’re just stories giving instructions on how to live, then there’s no need for the deity behind them. They’re like Aesop’s fables.
Remember the gay marriage debate?
One point that is brought up is Adam and Eve. But that is just a story, of course. But now, this just a story is used to create public policy. There’s no evidence or analysis done of the actual situation, just recourse to a thousands of years old story. People are strange.
Atrocities from our perspective and your simple interpretation of the passages. Why you won’t concede that these texts can’t be allowed to have the same mystery and complexity as quantum mechanics is puzzling.
If it is a story, does it reflect something that is inherently true.
I need to stop as if you read one my earlier posts today we had some pretty sad news of another friend dying with no warning and that’s the latest in a series in short order.
Need to go where there’s energy and rehashing epistemological points wastes energy.
Would be interested in Dr.Clam’s take though
Of course they can have mystery and complexity. There’s your point conceded. As a story it may reflect something something true. You can call that conceded too if you want to. Instruction is one level the Exodus story works on.
But you can’t deny it also work on the simply level of telling a literal story. It has a narrative; things happen. We can look at those things that happen and make a judgement about them. For example, are the action taken by characters to make things happen right or wrong. One of the things that happens in that story is the Holy Spirit kills a whole lot of children in order to force a man to release some people.Why won’t you concede that we can make a judgement about that action?