S2E3.1: Coffee, Creation, Vegans, Myths, Beliefs about the Bible

An extra episode, to cover the various topics that I wasn't able to in the main episodes in season two so far. Also: an announcement for the funding for this series.              
-----------------------------------------  

Transcript

S2 – Coffee, Creation, Vegans, Myths, Bible

Welcome to "What do you mean God speaks?" This is the first extra episode of the 2nd season, “Where we’re at: Coffee, Creation, Vegans, Myths, Beliefs, and the Bible.”

[ short music ]

Coffee? What’s that doing in the title? Ok, so, I have an announcement. We now have a funding site for this series. I think I mentioned before that I was considering Patreon. However, I decided to use a different platform, called, “Buymeacoffee.com.” One reason is that this name has a more laid back vibe to it, like: this series has been helpful? Treat me to a coffee, or lunch, or whatever. But, more to the point, I think that Buymeacoffee will be a lot less hassle for those of you who want to support this series in this way. You don’t need to make an account, or register for membership or anything, unless you want to set up a monthly support schedule. For one-time support, you just need to enter your email, enter the number of “coffee” you want to buy me, from 1, to however many you’d like, and use your credit card—that’s it. The second reason is because I don’t want to make any exclusive content. I mean I guess I can do something like a Q&A, but even that, you can always send questions to me by other means. As for the actual content— the podcast episodes—I want these to be available for everyone. At least, until the funds I set up for the podcast hosting site runs out in a year or two. Then, it will be unavailable for everyone. Yes… I have a dark sense of humor.

Your support will go into things like paying for that aforementioned hosting site, or costs like, equipment maintenance, services, or buying the license for the music you hear. And for literally buying me coffee and lunch. See, each episode on average takes me anywhere between three to five days to plan, write, record, and edit, and I can do this because my adjunct faculty work and on-call church ministry gives me the opening I need in my schedule. The downside of it is, that pays about as well as you think it does. Which is fine. I make do. But, having some more funds for actual coffee and lunch is appreciated! Again, as I said before, I thank you just dropping by to listen; and you can support by subscribing, following, or rating this series on platforms like Apple, and especially by sharing this series with those you think will also be interested. But, if you want to go that extra distance and buy me coffee and lunch, you can do so by going to: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/PaulSoC/

The link is also at the end of each episode description.

Now, let’s talk about the actual episodes in the second season.  

So, we’re now three episodes in for “Genesis,” and I’ve got to say, it was tough. The ideas and issues I’ve been trying to explore and grapple with in these three episodes are quite complicated and are kinda tangled together—and they involve some of the fiercest debates that’s happening at the frontlines of science and religion, Christianity and atheism, and so on. So, a lot’s at stake. And the thing is, the particular combination of the ideas that I presented in these episodes to help you understand Genesis… it’s not something that people arguing against each other about God, Creation, and science, usually bring up, or even know about. I mean, some of them may mention parts of it, but they don’t put them together, though I’d say they should. So, hopefully, I have navigated them so far in a ways that will be helpful for those who’re interested. 

Anyway, that was one reason why there was a lot of talk about science and Genesis so far. I mean the other reason is, this is one of the areas I studied and wrote on. But, you may find it surprising that my actual goal is to sort of wean our thinking about Genesis off from science—to put a proper distance between the two, so to speak. Now, the more popular conversations about Genesis have been about how our current science fits with Genesis. One group, likely the largest, say that it doesn’t. And that group includes both the atheists and Christians—though a very specific type of atheists and Christians. Both sides almost perfectly mirror each other in their very simplistic understanding of Genesis, and their insistence that Genesis must somehow do what modern science does—that it should be doing the exact same job. And these atheists think Bible is failing at it, while these Christians—called the Creationists—think that modern science failed its job. A smaller group wants to show how Genesis still “fits” with what science is saying… but, it still treats Genesis as doing sort of like the same job as science. And both groups are too close. Genesis and science is too close. Then, there is the other extreme, with people thinking that the Genesis account of Creation has nothing to do with science, but only about “theological” matters. Except it is clearly talking about Nature—about the creation of the sky, seas, earth, stars, life, and everything—and if all that has nothing do with science, then whatever “theological” points that Genesis is making can’t amount to much, at least to anything that’s relevant for us today. That’s too far a distance. 

The metaphor I’d use, off the top of my head here, is that one is trying to describe the contours of the land—the mountains, rivers, the forests, and so on—and their relation to each other, while the other is getting its hands right into it, studying the trees, the soil, the rocks, the water and its flow. Yes, I know, science can also investigate the forest, rivers, and mountains. I said, it’s a metaphor. Anyway, it’s not doing the same job. But, they do point to the same things at a different level of resolution. And they affect each other in a different way. You wouldn’t have gone to study the trees or the water, without that larger view of the forest and rivers. But, your fuller understanding of forest and rivers can and should change based on your hands-on investigation of trees and water. That is why I explored science and Genesis in the way I did in the last three episodes.

Anyway, there were a couple of notable things that I didn’t bring up. 

First is one that people who follow the popular debates about Genesis and science would have likely expected to hear about: evolution. Now, I did mention evolution a few times, but I didn’t discuss it at length for two reasons—three, if you count the lack of time. And both have to do with the reason why evolution has become such a flashpoint for some Christians. The first is that evolution seems to imply a certain view about what it means to be a human being. Which is why, I am bringing up evolution in the episode where we explore the creation of Adam and Eve. The second is that evolution raises the question about whether science makes belief in God redundant. So, if different living species came into being through evolution, and the principles that define this process, would that mean that God did not create living things? However, if you’ve been listening to the past episodes, say, episodes one and four from the first season, and how I’ve connected those episodes to this season’s exploration of Genesis Creation account, you should already have an answer to that question. Whatever principles that guide or govern how living species come to be, it’s… the Logos of God, God speaking. And if evolution describes that, then that’s what it is. So, I didn’t think there was a need to specifically bring up evolution. Instead, I brought up the idea of the multiverse. Because that is the current issue between science and Christianity that has been raising the same sort of question. And of course, it has the same sort of answer, as you found out in the previous episode.

Well, there’s one question that someone could still raise about Genesis and evolution. What about the phrase in Genesis, that God created every living thing “according to their kind”? This phrase, in some church circle has been quoted as a statement against evolution. But, I’d say this misses the mark. That’s because this phrase says two things. First is that different kind of living things God created are distinct in a way that they cannot be mixed back together. So, once you have cats and rats, they can’t merge back into cat-rats—even if you think that’d be kind of neat. And evolution doesn’t do that either; if anything, evolution tends to branch out living creatures into different and distinct species, not the reverse. So, if you want cat-rats, you want genetic engineering and some mad scientists, not evolution. The other thing that the phrase, God created each thing according to their kind, is saying is that God created every living species, not just some. And I think I’ve already answered that question. Now, I’m not at all saying that Christians have to believe in evolution, though I suppose biologists would like it if you do. What I’m saying is, you can disbelieve it, but just don’t drag Genesis into it. Or at least if you have to, you should know not every Christian needs to agree. 

One other thing I’ve left out regarding the opening chapter of Genesis is this. And it has to with what God says at the end; that he gives fruits and plants as food to humanity, and plants as food to all the birds and the creatures living on land. So, what about carnivores? What about lions? And what about the creatures in the sea? Now, let me be clear. It’s hard to know what to make of it, and I have not come to a position on it myself. Does that mean that every living thing on land, including of course, human beings, were originally vegans, or at least, vegetarians? I mean our current scientific knowledge goes against that view hard. But, the Bible says what it says, and you got to deal with that.

Except what God says in this passage isn’t the Word of creation; that is, God does not say, “Let there be x,” which brings things into existence, and creates them to be what they are and do what they do. Rather, God is speaking this after creating everything, and more, God is initiating a conversation with living things, by saying, “I’m giving you plants and fruits as food.” So, God is either telling them what He would like them to do, or God is pointing to specific things out as gifts for them. And of course, God doesn’t tell the creatures living in the sea what to eat. And so, considering that “land,” represented for the ancient Hebrews the realm humans could reach, and land-animals the creatures we could possibly domesticate, it may mean that God wanted humans and creatures living with humans like livestock, pets, and such, to have a vegetarian diet. Maybe. 

So, this is still an open-ended question for me. And no, I am not a vegetarian. I like meat. And also, I left this out, because there wasn’t a way I can nicely fit this topic with what I was covering in the previous episodes. So, that’s why I’m putting it here. 

I think one of the key ideas that I wanted to present in the first set of episodes about Genesis, was how we need to recognize the profound significance and insight that is held by the ancient Hebrew and Middle Eastern cosmology—which is the context in which the Genesis narrative is told. Some scholars call this the “mytho-poetic” view of Genesis. The word, “myth” here does not mean it’s a false belief. What scholars mean by the word, “myth,” is that it is our understanding of reality that is presented in a format of a story. Myths are stories about the world, ourselves—and so, about everything. But, as I’ve repeatedly stated, ancient mythical views understand each thing in the world differently from how we do.  

What I wanted to emphasize—and this is something that even those who read Genesis in the context of ancient Hebrew cosmology often seem to miss, or at least don’t talk about—was how these mythical images and ideas they present are relevant even in our age, and how they could be translated into our worldview. And the thing is, Christian thinkers have discussed this very issue long ago. I described this in the first episode of this season; so ,in the early church, when Christian theologians were drawing upon Greek philosophy to articulate their faith, they interpreted these ideas and imagery in Genesis by trying to “translate” them into the more philosophical framework that they were working with. So, for example, that’s why they understood “water” in Genesis as “formless matter.” Greek philosophers had also been doing the same with their mythical cosmology. I in turn translated that philosophical concept of “formless matter,” into a more contemporary idea of “possibility.” Though I am more or less drawing from the Aristotelian tradition in philosophy for that particular transition.

Anyway, an aside. You may have noticed I frequently brought up the term, “possibility,” as what waters in Genesis represented. That’s because I think it’s such an interesting, and even mind-boggling idea that Genesis is hinting. Ok, for just one example. And if you listened to the episode, “God before Genesis,” you will understand what I’m going to say better. In the last two episodes, remember how I mentioned that the fathomless dark depth of water in Genesis is a way of conceptualizing infinite possibility, and God speaks and that possibility became something—which was a world where things can happen, and happen in a sequence in time? But, wait. Isn’t every world a world where things happen and time flows? What other world is possible anyway? Well… it seems to me that what Genesis was trying to describe, but cannot do so except by this imagery of the watery abyss, is the possibility that God can speak forth a “world” without any of that. But, most of us can’t even imagine it—a world where things don’t happen, or there’s no sequence in time—it’s like a… Zen koan, or the most mind-bending thing physicists speculate about. It’s dark to us, and kind of frightening, like dark, fathomless water.

And this brings us to another thing I wanted to talk about, but didn’t quite have time. We, today, still think and view our world with the very same mythical images from the time of the ancient Hebrews. We still think possibilities or the unimaginable world beyond our knowledge as a kind of dark, endless depth of water, or sea. We can see that, by the way, in our science fiction. Star Trek opens with the words, Space, the final frontier. These are the voyages of a starship. We voyage into the unknown, exploring endless possibilities, and truths it holds, in a ship, with captains and sailors. Not a plane, but a ship. And we imagine space as dark. Even though it is lit with starlight. We think there could be terrifying monsters that dwell in the depths… of space. And I don’t mean aliens; I mean creatures beyond our understanding. Like how the monsters of the deep like the dragon Tiamat or Leviathan was for the ancient Middle Eastern people. The monsters that Genesis states that God created. (Oh, if you’ve been wondering where that is in your English Bible, it’s sometimes translated as whales. But, in the Hebrew Bible, the term is “taninim,” and the dragon Leviathan and Rahab are tanin.) So, you have H.P. Lovecraft and its cosmic horror stories. And we play computer games where huge bug-like monsters or even literal dragons appear in space, and we go, yeah, ok. 

Or, consider how we think about seed and trees. I said seed-bearing plants and trees for ancient Hebrews represented Life itself. And we still think with that image. Do you know how we conceive the entire history of Life—basically, of every living thing—from an evolutionary perspective? We draw a tree; in fact, we call it the evolutionary tree. The term you’ll find in the encyclopedia is the “phylogenetic tree.” You consider your individual life, as it is connected with your parents and their parents—so basically, your life as part of something—you call that your family tree. 

I’ve already described how the imagery of Light, sky, land, and such is, and they made sense. And I mean, when Leonardo da Vinci looked up at the sky and wanted to fly, to reach the unbounded possibilities, we get what he wanted. When eldritch monsters and dragons appear in a ship journeying through space, we get it. We don’t go, “What a strange thing you imagined.” 

We think and imagine and feel, mythically. And the opening of Genesis paints our world with these imagery that are both utterly fantastic, and yet completely familiar; it’s part of us. And all of that, all of that which moves and stirs your heart and soul, as well as the mind, which Genesis painted its narrative with, is what God created. They are all God speaking. 

And this should raise the question of what we should think about the Bible, or at least, the first eleven chapters of the Bible, which biblical scholars call the “Primeval History.”

Christians say the Bible is the word of God. And we explored what that meant in an entire episode, episode twelve of the first season of this series. So, we won’t talk about that here. But, let me raise a related point. For Christians, it is a core belief that the Bible is the word of God. That it is something through which God speaks personally to people. That’s core; every card-carrying Christian would affirm this. But… and, I realize this is also something I’ve covered in another episode, specifically, “which is the real Christianity?” which was in the first season; I’ve been referencing past episodes a lot today—think of it as a plug in for the past episodes, if you haven’t listened. Anyway, core belief like “the Bible is the word of God,” always have further content, even if it isn’t big enough to spend an entire podcast episode on it. We need to know what we mean by saying, “The Bible is the word of God.” 

So, some Christians have understood that as the Bible having no errors, because if God speaks through it, then it must be true. But, that’s usually not enough, not enough to work with in actually living it out, anyway. So, we ask, what we mean by errors, and what we mean by true. And some Christians further think the Bible has no scientific errors. And they become the Creationists, or anti-evolution, and such. Some other Christians say the Bible is infallible—so, it is true on the matters of our salvation and living. But, by that they mean, the Bible is true on things that God wants to say to us, which is about our salvation and relationship with Him. Now, both groups have the same core; they both believe God speaks to us personally through the Bible, and so the Bible is true. But, what that means can differ. 

But, the problem is, for one group, saying the Bible is the word of God is saying that the Bible has no scientific errors. It is saying the same thing. Because we always think of the core in terms of the content we put into it, and rarely do we ask ourselves whether we can understand that same core differently. That is, it’s often very difficult to separate what’s core with what isn’t, once the two are linked together like that. And this is what’s behind a lot of really hostile conversations over how to read Genesis. It is more than just how to understand a particular passage; it is whether you are a Christian, because to some Creationists, to say Genesis creation account isn’t a scientific account is saying God does not speak through the Bible. It’s a core issue, even though it really should not be; and it will remain a core, unless we learn to discern that almost seamless line between the core belief regarding the Bible, and our particular take on that belief. 

Which is why, again, I made that episode about the core beliefs back in Season One.

Hmmm? What do I think about the question whether the book of Genesis has scientific errors? Well, let me go back to that analogy I gave couple of episodes ago about the Father talking to his child. The child asks, what are you doing, and the Father says I’m teaching the computer how to play a game—even though he’s actually writing in the code for the game’s A.I. Now, is what the Father saying an error? Your answer to that will determine whether you should think that I believe Genesis has errors.

The last bit, before I go. I mentioned the term, “biblical scholars.” Oh, and just because someone’s a biblical scholar doesn’t mean that they are Christian or Jewish. Often, they aren’t. It’s like how you can be an expert in say, history of the American Revolution, without being an American, or even thinking that it was a good thing to have happened.

Anyway, my area of research and teaching, is philosophical theology, or philosophy of religion—it depends on whether you want to emphasize Christian or non-Christian side of it. And in my case, it also includes science and religion as a sub-section. Now, this area is related to the field of biblical studies like say, international economy is to accounting, or say, entrepreneurship—yes, odd comparison, I know—which is to say, it is related, but only in a general way. So, the extent that I draw upon their work is at a fairly general level, like say, introductory level—as far as scholarly work goes. And that means those who are interested in delving deeper into the topics I bring up, should do so by visiting and reading up by starting with the books with titles like “Introduction to,” or “Survey of,” the New Testament or the Old Testament; which ones specifically, I will leave it to you to ask your nearest seminary professor in biblical studies, or if such is unavailable, a pastor. Though I can say the same about other topics explore too, whether it’s about science and religion, or theology, or philosophy of religion. If you want a really general starter for all of it, from scholarly books, I’ll just mention Alister McGrath’s Christian Theology Introduction.

So, that’s about it for this week. Thank you for listening, and please continue to support this series by following, rating, and sharing this series. And you can also support this podcast by buying me coffee, at www.buymeacoffee.com/PaulSoC

Next episode, the First Human; Adam and Eve.