Jack Collins on Reading Genesis Well
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 июл 2024
- This interview with Jack Collins covers whether the early chapters of Genesis are poetic, scientific, or ordinary language; how C.S. Lewis can help us read Genesis well; what it means to this part of the Bible "literally;" how these chapters speak to the deepest questions human beings ask; and more.
Dr. C. John “Jack” Collins is Professor of Old Testament at Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis, MO. He is the author of many books, including Reading Genesis Well: Navigating History, Poetry, Science, and Truth in Genesis 1-11 (Zondervan Academic, 2018).
Purchase Reading Genesis Well here: www.amazon.com/Reading-Genesi...
Another book referenced in this video is Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided By Politics and Religion: www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind...
Truth Unites is a mixture of apologetics and theology.
Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) serves as senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Ojai.
Website: gavinortlund.com/
Twitter: / gavinortlund
Facebook: / truthunitespage
Become a patron: / truthunites
My books:
--Retrieving Augustine’s Doctrine of Creation: Ancient Wisdom for Current Controversy: www.amazon.com/Retrieving-Aug...
--Anselm’s Pursuit of Joy: A Commentary on the Proslogion: www.amazon.com/Anselms-Pursui...
--Finding the Right Hills to Die On: The Case for Theological Triage: www.amazon.com/Finding-Right-...
--Theological Retrieval for Evangelicals: Why We Need Our Past to Have a Future: www.amazon.com/Theological-Re...
Just ordered reading genesis well. I have several Hugh Ross books .
Reading Genesis Well (RGW) is the single most important book I've read from a personal apologetic standpoint, ironic, as if I recall correctly Collins explicitly states that it's not an apologetic within the work itself lol. I've always found the Christian holistic worldview arguments to be exceptionally strong (think those similar to Keller and McLaughlin) or, if nothing else, they're a whole lot stronger than the competitors. My main faith struggles have been in the derivatives, with perhaps no area being greater than the fact that if Christianity is true then it logically follows that Gen. 1-11 should be substantively true as well, and should, at least at a core level, be compatible with Jesus's and Paul's interpretations of it, and therefore historical. And this historical reconstructive conviction has always caused a significant portion of Collin's "honesty" tension. Thankfully, RGW applies intense intellectual rigor and faithfulness toward the Biblical text while also not neglecting every other area of knowledge (or, if we prefer, General Revelation), and the result gives the gasping Christian room to breath. I'm truly thankful for this book and Collin's wider body of works, as well as your own (loved your recent Augustine book, particularly Chapter 4!). Anyway, I think all of that demonstrates the goodness of what you are doing doing here, that is the blend of theology and apologetics on Truth Unites; it truly helps to meet a pastoral type need that many laymen and women like myself feel as we seek understanding in our faith with the firm confidence that Jesus is the Truth (I view apologetics as primarily designed to demonstrate that reality that our faith (theology) and the Truth are harmonious). For the Church and the glory of Christ, keep up the great work!
I totally know that gasping for air feeling. So glad you found the Augustine book useful - Augustine has been such a "pressure reliever" for me personally. Its like, if the greatest theologian of the early church believed something, I'm pretty sure we are okay to explore it. And I agree with you about Collins book - it really strikes a great balance of being both true to the text but respectful to science.
Genesis episodes are my fav.!
I bought your _Retrieving Augustine's Doctrine of Creation_. I read some of it before getting back on here. Having read a couple books on Genesis from Ancient Near East scholars, I opted for your Augustine-based book, and for now, I will hear Professor Collins in your video.
Very interesting, I will be buying the book. Thank you Gavin Ortlund for doing these interviews. God bless!
This was such a blessing! Thank you, both!
Thank you for this interview!
Hugh Ross has a very good scientific model of the creation account
Much better are Russell Humphreys and Jason Lisle's scientific model of the universe.
Hugh Ross presents a testable creation model that is backed up by scripture. Hugh has challenged Jason lisle to present a testable model , Jason won’t do it.
Thanks I was just introduced to Jack through Stephen Meyer. Great insight. I want to buy the book and learn more.
so glad it was helpful! his book is great.
Thank you!
I’ve never understood why people have a problem believing in God and reading Genesis. Maybe because I grew up in a church who believed in the supernatural power of the spirit. I mean we are talking about the Creator of the Universe and the Bible is the word of God, not the literal words of God. There is a difference. I question if a person has had a life changing experience with Jesus if their faith rest on Genesis matching up exactly with Science.
You might be unaware of just how intensely some churches push YEC. Many say rejecting it is rejecting God.
No model better explains the human condition and experience than that of the Fallen Image being Redeemed by its Creator.
One thing that strikes me in comparing Genesis to ancient cosmogenies, especially the Egyptian and Greek among others, is that the pagan divine powers were forces/powers very much *within* the natural order. Two primordial states of matter (which are also deities and have some essential power) comingle due to a kind of natural and inevitable progression and give birth to a raft of other cosmic/natural entities/forces which largely by accident of continuing processes lead to another set, and so on until you have the final and most person-like pantheon which behave something like humans do and rule over the various aspects of our world. The gods are being "made" along with the cosmos (and, primordially, *are* the aspects of the cosmos). Humans are simply the latest stage of entities to arise at the mercy of the previous. Gods, man, and nature are all wrapped up in one long, mysterious development.
Meanwhile, the God of the Hebrews just decided to speak the entire universe (which He is apart from and utterly beyond) into existence based on His personal whim in a rather untroubled work week. Then we see Him characterized in later Scriptures as an interested craftsman heaping up all the great mountains of the earth on a little scale to be measured, with the nations of the earth being like the fine dust left over in the pan that doesn't even register on the scales. He holds and weighs out the collected waters of all the seas in the cup of a single hand as a conscientious craftsman appraising how His project is coming along, or a property owner cateloging his goods.
Nature is utterly and dramatically depersonalized and de-mystified, God is utterly soveriegn, and mankind has been positioned as the fallen imager of God over the natural order which God has placed under mankind's feet.
The Bible isn't just anti-pagan in that it says, "Don't worship those gods." Its very fundamental depiction of reality intentionally leaves no room for the pagan way of thinking.
We take Genesis for granted, but it is extremely and consciously striking when read in comparison to literally anything and everything else.
If Genesis doesn't read like Mythology..what I must ask does?
Actual mythology...?
cool dude
On רקיע RQY' and the claim folks back then thought of it as a solid, I have noticed that due to atmospherics clouds very often have a solid base and could lead folks to think in that direction.
What doesn’t make sense is that people come to Christ thru faith and some leave because of sight ? No one has all the answers only God himself .
Does the literal and literary versions of the first books of Genesis lead to many Christians now believing in evolution? Evolution seems anathema to the faith, yet people try to reconcile the two to "fit in" with "settled science".
Is “poetical” an authentic genre for the time?
Yes. Gilgamesh came soon after.
My personnal interprétation of the sky being solid is i believe that there was a layer of thick water between solid esrth and outer space.....wich could explain the warmth all over the Earth as we find in tropical vegetation & animalls ..a kind of '' aquarium'' or '' vivarium'' effect...so there was no winter or ,4 seasons....or falling of train ...just dew in the mornings ...a very diffetent Earth as we know it today ....and when the flood of Noah's time came...all this water wich was this solid sky fell to Earth ....for 40 days all around the world ...imagine the quantity of water!! After the flood oceans appeared ...because of excess of this water....and no longer this vivarium ..aquarium affect so 4 seasons set in...rain fell or snow etc etc....MAYBE thats why in Revelation it is mentioned....on the new Earth there will be NO OCEANS!!?
Why would God create oceans in genesis if the world was for humans....we dont inhabit oceans.only.my opinion ....
Oceans are where the majority of our oxygen comes from thru cyanobacteria.
So l guess Ken Ham isnt your favourite, sarcasm.
How to read [insert any Tanakh writing] well:
1. know Hebrew
2. know Ancient Near East History like the back of your hand
3. have a good foundation and understanding of text and literary criticism
4. don't be consumed with the foolish biases of Augustinian absurdities (which were filtered through layers of mistranslation and willful mischaracterization)
When a meteor flies towards earth and *_impacts_* our atmosphere, often the collision is forceful enough to cause it to explode upon impact and for the pieces to then burn up upon entry ... and yet birds can and do fly in/through the very same skies, just as Moses said God created them to in Genesis 1:20.
It seems to me like "firmament" or "rāqîaʿ" is a perfectly fine word to describe such diversity of the heavens.
It has more to do with speed. Also, birds don't fly that high or fast, and they fly sideways instead of from space down to earth.
Granted I’m not a scholar, but I can’t imagine the author of Genesis writing, or the original audience understanding, anything other than exactly what is written. I think the text means exactly what it says. No nuance.
Do you ever write anything with nuance?
and keep in mind, the ancient Hebrews lived in a high context culture, meaning most of their language is filled with nuance. Very rarely do people in high context cultures mean "exactly what is written" some of them even consider the very direct form of language as rude and insulting.
So you think Adam and Eve were conjoined together like twins? It’s almost like we should take Genesis literally if it’s meant literally and figuratively if it was meant to be figurative.
Conjoined twins? Haha. I’m not suggesting that because it’s never crossed my mind. That’s quite a stretch. I think the author and audience believed this account to be literally true. Whether that’s actually what happened is another discussion.
@@KC-fb8ql
And while some of the ancient audience did take this account literally, many took it figuratively. But neither thought it was of much significance unless you're denying the theological lessons.
No nuance. Sums up the worldview aspect of the discussion quite well.
So when it is obviously not true or inconsistent we call it figurative or world-building...not wrong, even though we know that the ancient Hebrew scribes were ignorant of basic scientific facts and did indeed think that certain things were literally true; but when it is a matter of God's power and goodness then that is literally true.
So the 'figurative' passages or inconsistencies do not represent human mistakes as they do IN EVERY OTHER BOOK but god's accommodation of that ignorance.
Then why is the solid sky 'figurative' but the resurrection is not? We have no evidence for either and we know both are impossible.
ANY human book of any importance can be read like this. So this is proof that this a human book made by humans like every other book ever written.
Because Genesis isn't a biography like the Gospels are.