“It was only after a friendly discussion with a SDA who questioned my belief in ‘a real talking snake’ rather than Satan in disguise that I freed myself to read Genesis chapters 2 and 3 as a powerful allegory. Later I learned to read chapter 1 as a grand celebratory poem of creation, suitably positioned at the very beginning of the Bible – and it’s not the only poem about creation in the Bible, either!”

“Now my belief in the Bible has never been stronger and I can reconcile the creation with the world around me.”

God’s spirit hovering & creating on the edge

“It is precisely here, at the face of Tehom, that the breath of the Divine flutters, we are told, like a nesting dove over her fledgling chicks. Concerned, protective, nurturing, urging her brood into flight, so too the breath/wind/spirit of God returns again and again to the edges of disorder and chaos, unsettling the norms, disrupting the habitual, comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable, cracking an opening for novelty to emerge. The Hebrew verb, merachefet, to sweep or flutter, is “vibration, movement. … Motion, which is the essential element in change, originates with God’s dynamic presence.” There are physicists who remind us that the components of matter are really vibrations, fluttering packets of energy shimmying the dance of becoming: “the microscopic landscape is suffused with tiny strings whose vibrational patterns orchestrate the evolution of the cosmos.” The divine vibrating resiliently invites chaos toward cosmos, organizing, constraining, enticing, luring. The work of creation is never ending and never static. We are a part of its harvest, and we are, with the cosmos and the Divine, co-creators. The ruach continues to vibrate across the face of tehom, though us, in us, with us: creatio continua, continuous creating.”

Artson, B. S. (n.d.). Vibrating Over the Face of the Deep: God’s creating and ours.

Do yourself a favour and just read the whole article – its not very long 🙂   Yes we know the implication of chaos in Gen 1 is a touch astray (it’s more Psa 104) but still a good read.

“I eventually decided to…see if I could be convinced that the Bible and Science could coexist … You guys who’ve been…putting the info out there are literally life savers. Thanks.”

{aww shucks}

Is Christ Divided? Responding to difference

In 1987 articles in a liberal Christadelphian Magazine (The Endeavour), caused quite a stir and calls for dramatic action being circulated to many UK ecclesias.  Overseas groups also contributed to the clamour.  In response a large number of believers signed a joint letter published in the Christadelphian Magazine.  The letter pointed out the BASF was a human document with human limitations, exploring Scripture and questioning isn’t wrong and that ecclesias – not groups or associations of ecclesias – should moderate their member’s activities.  Useful counsel today, although our magazines now and Australian ecclesia groups (like the South Australian IEAC) would likely disagree.  The letter is below:

Continue reading

“. . . they were using out of context quotes, outdated sources, misrepresentation of facts, arguments copied from evangelicals, and ignorance of basic evolutionary science.
The more I saw such weak arguments . . . the more I became convicted that there were no good arguments against evolution. I was not alone in this.”

Is Adam as your father essential for salvation? Literalists think so

A reoccurring trope of literalists is a bizarre limitation on God’s plan of salvation.  A classic instance is found in bro Phil Perry’s unfortunate “Theistic Evolution Refuted” (we’re working off version 1.9 – we’re not tempted to pay for the current version).  He says if you’re not literally descended from Adam you can’t be saved by Jesus.  The same Jesus said God could raise up children to Abraham from stones (Luke 3:8).  But in the world of literalists if you don’t have Adam’s blood in your veins God can’t save you.  Here’s the detail:

Continue reading