|
Adam and Eve: Did They Really Exist? |
|
BILL HOLDRIDGE: OK, our next speaker is Father Carl Hansen. Father Hansen is the rector of All Saints Episcopal Church in Carmel and is also the author of the weekly column in the Monterey Herald, "Friends in Faith". You also will be receiving fifteen minutes Father Hansen. So welcome. [applause] CARL HANSEN: Thank you very much. It's good to be with you again. There's an ancient Hasidic story about a young man named Mordecai who simply refused to study the Torah. And his parents were desperate to try to get him to study. So they took him to the wise rabbi in the city of Carlin. And they left him there for a whole day. Mordecai, after they left, was a little nervous. The rabbi went and lay down on his couch. He didn't say a word. And he invited Mordecai to come over and lie beside him. And he took Mordecai's head and he placed it on his chest. And there for the longest time, Mordecai heard the heartbeat of this great teacher. And eventually when his parents came to pick him up again, nothing was said. But you know, from that time forward, Mordecai never had any problems studying the Torah. And one day he became a great rabbi himself. And someone asked him, Rabbi Mordecai, how is it that you are so wise in the understanding of the Law? And he told this story of how the great rabbi at Carlin taught him the meaning of the Law. In Jeremiah 31:33 we are promised that the Law will be written on our hearts. That God will make a new covenant with his people. And we will not have to teach one another what the Law means. Because we will all have it written on our hearts. Because God will forgive our iniquities and remember our sins no more. I will put my Law within them. I will write it upon their hearts. I come before you tonight as a brother in Christ. You and I drink from the same cup. We have placed our trust in the same Lord. We may view Scripture differently. But one thing is certain. We are redeemed sinners saved by the blood of Christ shed for us on the cross. Whether we want to accept one another or not, we are members of one flock. We are the inheritors of that new covenant foretold by Jeremiah. The word of God is not simply on the pages of the Bible. The word of God is written on our hearts because that's where Christ dwells, in our hearts. I'm going to show how the Bible is God's word, inspired by the Holy Spirit, and intended to help us, the faithful, to know Christ and to share him with others. This debate isn't really about Adam and Eve. It's about the meaning of biblical inspiration, as we've heard already. When John asked me to debate on this subject of biblical inspiration, he said, I'll take the position that it's inspired, and you of course will take the position that it isn't. Frankly, I was shocked that he would be so unaware of any understanding of inspiration other than the literal way. Adam and Eve probably did exist at some time in history. Scientists are tracing our DNA now back to an original man and woman -- I'm surprised you didn't bring that up -- from whom all humanity has come. But the creation stories in Genesis chapters 1 and 2, two different stories by the way, are not an account of those first two human beings, whomever they are, wherever they may have been. Rather it is an account of the nature of humanity, the nature of God and the relationship between God and creation. John's comment made me realize that what I'm going to say to you tonight may be news to many of you. And I trust that the Lord for at least some of you will help it to be good news. And please understand that what I'm going to say is not the radical speculation of this single liberal Christian. Rather this is the view of millions of faithful, fruitful Christians who love the Lord and have turned their lives over to his service. Second Timothy 3:16 says all Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction and for training in righteousness. We need to ask the question, what does it mean that the Bible is inspired? How is it that the Bible is useful? We ought not to be offended or threatened by asking the question. God does not intend us to understand the Bible only in one way, the literal way. It can be true while not being historically true in every detail. There are ways of knowing beyond the scientific way. If the Bible is completely inerrant, then there can only be one right way to understand it. And of course, we know that there are many ways Scripture is interpreted by faithful people. I trust that none of us would be so arrogant as to suggest that our way is the only way. Let me explain then what biblical inspiration means and what it does not mean. First, the Bible is inspired because it is about Jesus. We as Christians believe that the historical person of Jesus Christ is the Word of God. He is God in the flesh as a human being. And his teaching, his example, his sacrifice are God's expression to us of eternal life and eternal love. God in Jesus defines what love is. You are a Christian because Jesus has touched your heart, and his love is therefore written on it. From Genesis to Revelation, the Bible is about Jesus, God creating the world so that love might be shown forth; redeeming the world so that love might find its fullest expression in forgiveness, reconciliation and a new creation. Each of you, some more conscious of it than others perhaps, has entered into that story of God's salvation of the world through Jesus Christ. The Bible is inspired because it is about Jesus, and it is about you. Second, the Bible is inspired because through it we come to know the love of God. Whether we read it prayerfully and meditate upon it, or academically and study it in its historical context, or liturgically and hear it as a people, God speaks to us. Because of your faith, God speaks to you today through the Bible just as God touched the lives of its authors in their own place and time. It is the record of the journey of faith for God's people, beginning with the goodness of our creation, our disobedience and denial, our tendency toward false gods, our betrayal of trust, our fear, our selfishness. But there is a greater story which runs parallel to ours, the story of God's faithfulness and forgiveness, of God's search for lost sheep, of God's healing and renewal, of God's unwillingness to let go of us no matter how undeserving we are, of God's promise to be with us always. The Bible is also inspired because it contains everything we need to know for salvation. In Christ, God has acted for once and for all time to reconcile humanity to himself and make us whole. In Christ, God has defeated Satan and all the forces that rebel against God. In Christ, God has made us holy and empowered us to live holy lives. The battle is won; the victory is Christ's. And we are the bearers of that good news. Finally, the Bible is inspired because the church says it is. Now it is the collection of writings which give us our identity as Christians, and continues to be the common text we share as we seek to follow Jesus as our Lord. It was put together by a gathering of bishops in the fourth century. These men prayerfully decided whether to include the Hebrew Bible and which of the Christian gospels and epistles would make up the Christian Bible. These men did not say that God doesn't speak to us in other ways. But they did say that they guaranteed that in these writings the faith of the Apostles was handed down. They certified that God speaks to Christians through the books contained in the Bible. That it is an authentic faith account of those who knew Jesus, both in his earthly life and as risen Lord. And so the Bible is inspired in all these ways. But it is not inerrant or infallible in every detail. If I were to ask for a show of hands as to how many of you think that the Pope is infallible, I suspect that few of you would raise your hand. With all due respect to our Catholic brothers and sisters, Protestants do not believe in the infallibility of the Pope's statements, no matter what the circumstances are in which he makes them. He and his cohorts are human beings, and as holy and wise as they may be, they are nonetheless subject to the shortcomings of being human. The Pope is not God. We may respect what he says and weigh it heavily because of his stature, but our conscience as believers ourselves, informed by our own faith community and devoted to the Lord, requires us to prayerfully make our own decision about the Pope's statements, and for that matter the statements of our pastor, or a fellow Christian, or even by those persons who wrote the Bible. So, since the early Christians wrote the Gospels and Epistles, and the bishops assembled in council selected them and certified them as reflective of the true faith, we must ask, if these people were fallible, how can the Bible be infallible? If these people were capable of making errors, how can the Bible be without errors? Now one answer, of course, is simply to say that it is a miracle. God made sure that no historical error, no misconception, no personal need or prejudice, no lack of wisdom, and no sin would cause an error in the Bible. Now you are free to think that way if you wish. But understand that one does not have to think that way in order to believe in the Bible. It's the same kind of thinking that says when communion is offered from a common cup, that you cannot contact germs because God would never allow harmful germs to contaminate the bread and the wine, the body and blood of Christ. Again, you can think that way if you want to. But a more cautious person would be no less faithful than you for using God's gift of common sense, and not receive from the cup when sick in order to protect others, or when vulnerable in order to protect yourself. A better answer is to realize that inerrancy and inspiration have nothing to do with each other. Inspiration means filling with spirit. Inerrancy means having no errors. The Bible is not inerrant, but it is inspired. Let me spend just a few minutes on some of the errors of the Bible. First, there are scientific errors. Biblical authors obviously thought the earth was flat by the way they described it in Genesis. God placed a dome over it called the firmament to hold the heavens. Water was above the firmament which would fall through the apertures in the form of rain. And there were waters below, which welled up in the form of springs. The Hebrew writers had a different view of the earth in relation to the universe than we do today. Now I think most of you would agree that they were wrong. The modern scientific view may be wrong too, but it's not quite as wrong as they were. We cannot expect ancient writers to have had the scientific knowledge we have today. But we can expect them to have had the same struggles with faith that we have, the same fears and hopes, the same eternal questions. That's why Genesis can be inspired while being scientifically wrong. Besides errors of science, there are historical errors in the Bible as well. Biblical history is certainly fallible. There's not a shred of historical evidence to suggest that anything like the world flood described in Genesis 6 through 8 ever took place. But plenty of evidence to suggest this is a folktale shared in many ancient cultures, and adapted in Hebrew lore as patriarchal history. Also, virtually all historians today believe that the conquest of Canaan took place over a hundred years time, yet the biblical account in Genesis is in one generation. Much of the Hebrew Bible has been proven to be generally true historically, but not all. There are historical errors. Not only because human beings are not omniscient, but also because historians of that day were as concerned to tell the faith story as to record the historical details accurately. In the Gospels we also find errors. Luke says Jesus was born while Quirinius was governor of Syria, and that Mary and Joseph were traveling to the city of David, Joseph's family home, because of the census the governor was taking. Now there are good historical records of that time, about 6 A.D., and there is no mention of such a census. But even if there were, the Lukan account conflicts with Matthew, who dates Jesus's birth two years before the death of Herod the Great, which would have been in 4 B.C. One or the other is simply wrong, perhaps both. You can easily look up these contradictions and many more yourself, particularly the resurrection appearances of Jesus and the whole circumstances surrounding the discovery of the empty tomb. But those are just a few. The simple truth is that the Gospel writers were not as concerned about historical accuracy as they were about the message of faith, based upon the historical events and their varied account as they were told through the oral history of the early church. There are also problems of morality in the Bible. A distressing story is found in 1 Samuel 15 which contains the verse [22]: "Surely to obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed than the fat of rams." As Jesus said later, God wants our hearts and obedience, not our empty sacrifices. We don't have trouble with that in 1 Samuel unless we know the context. Obedience in this case meant practicing genocide. Earlier in the chapter we read [at verse 3]: "Now go and attack Amalek and utterly destroy all that they have. Do not spare them but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey." Shall we justify genocide because it's found in Scripture? You're familiar with many such passages. How does such morality, if inerrant, stand in the light of Jesus who suffered and died for those who persecuted him and taught us to love our enemies. Even the New Testament is not an inerrant moral guide, however. We're instructed to honor immoral governments as the instrument of God; slavery was acceptable and if one was a slave was taught to be faithful to the master; wives were to be subject to the authority of their husbands because they were after all their husband's property. Well enough examples of scientific, historical and even moral errors in the Bible. It is the truth, not because it contains no human errors, but because the one who is truth speaks to us through the imperfections of our humanity. When the Bible is treated as God's inerrant word, it becomes an excuse to divide us, because we won't all agree on what is literal and what isn't. But when it is treated as the human encounter of God's revelation of love to the world, then we are free to explore the many faceted-richness of its meaning through the human figures who tell their stories. When the Bible is treated as God's inerrant word, it becomes an excuse for Christians to say that we have the truth, and no one else does. But when it is seen as the record of humanity's struggle with God, we can see the commonalities we share with people of other histories. We notice and respect our connections and not simply our differences. When the Bible is treated as God's inerrant word it becomes a weapon to use against others, to deny their dignity as children of God and to suggest that God will wipe them out, even torture them eternally unless they become one of us. Perhaps worst of all, when the Bible becomes God's inerrant word, it becomes our god, an idol, and we substitute it for a relationship with the living Lord. It provides the certainty of something we can hold onto. It's words are in black and white, and we are more secure therefore to have right and wrong so evident before our eyes. But this is not the path of faith, which demands patience and readiness, uncertainty and mobility, deep struggle over the love within our souls. A willingness to face our devils of pride, and the need to be in control and to feel superior. Faith is a journey not into the known, but into the unknown ambiguities of life. The beating heart of Jesus is in our ears and in our hearts. The word of God is alive within us and seeks to set us free. Faith does not require biblical inerrancy, but it does depend upon trust in Jesus. And that is all that matters. Thank you. [applause] |