Re: [asa] The ASA and the Soft Sciences (ASA focus for the future- dreaming)

Bernie, what I precisely said on Jan. 1 was *"I wonder, though, if the
assumption that the West will eventually deal with this most effectively is
correct. Maybe some of our brothers and sisters from parts of the world
that aren't so influenced by rationalism will some day offer some solutions
that we will need to integrate."
*
I don't know why you're fixated on whether this means something "new". If
aboriginal cultures can help us better understand the sort of ontological
mindset reflected in ANE origin myths, and that in turn helps us better
understand the meaning of the Biblical creation stories, I don't think that
has to be "new" to be a helpful corrective for those of us in the West.

I think also that you're completely missing the point with reference to the
framework view here. The framework view, helpful as it is, is nevertheless
a somewhat rationalistic reading of the text. It assumes that the original
author's intent was to present a picture-poem using a literary framework of
"days." Underlying that assumption is the further assumption that there is
a "problem" or "error" if the sequence of "days" is actually intended to
correspond with reality. Te framework view to some extent projects a
modern, Western view of what "reality" is onto the original author.

A notion like the Aboriginal Dreaming perhaps can help us get back into the
ANE author's ontological mindset. John Walton's work on the ancient near
eastern worldview is very helpful on this point -- the ANE cosmologists were
describing divine functions, not physical mechanisms. The notion that
cosmological Truth claims must correspond directly to physical reality is
nonsensical in this context. The effort is enter into the ANE writer's
world and ask whether the text is "true" *on the writer's own terms*. We in
the West have an incredibly hard time with that because those terms are so
foreign to us -- hence we use anachronisms like "ancient science" when
describing ANE cosmology.

David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology

On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>wrote:

> Pastor Murray said:
> "The notion of a "day" would be taken as a narrative element - whether it
> refers to a literal day or not would be seen as tangential to the point. To
> ask "is it a LITERAL day?" would be seen as a category error: like asking
> "what colour is 1 + 1"?"
>
> Same exact thing with the framework hypothesis- time independent- according
> to the hypothesis put forth and defended in the book "The Genesis Debate :
> Three Views on the Days of Creation."
>
> Pastor Murray said:
> "I never claimed this was a 'new' point of view, by the way"
>
> Then it sounds like we agree there's nothing new here to consider when
> trying to understand origins in light of Gen. 1. David Opderbeck said there
> was something new to offer with "aboriginal dreaming"- then referred to you
> and other things for follow-up.
>
> If it was a new approach to deal with origins, I would have enjoyed
> learning more about other opinions it would give, such as understanding the
> order of creation, and whether humans were made by fiat or not. But since
> you aren't claiming anything new it can offer, it is moot to go forward in
> discussion.
>
> Also, from what I read- this "dreaming" also seems similar to the idea
> expressed in the Bible book of Hebrews- that the earthly tabernacle and some
> other things are a copy of the ones in heaven.
>
> Bottom line- David Opderbeck seems to have an opinion that something can be
> contributed to the origins debate that is overlooked by the educated western
> world, but I have no idea what drives that opinion. "Dreaming" was supposed
> to be an example of a possibility.
>
> ...Bernie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
> Behalf Of Murray Hogg
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 11:22 AM
> To: ASA
> Subject: Re: [asa] The ASA and the Soft Sciences (ASA focus for the future-
> dreaming)
>
> Hi Bernie,
>
> The notion of a "day" would be taken as a narrative element - whether it
> refers to a literal day or not would be seen as tangential to the point. To
> ask "is it a LITERAL day?" would be seen as a category error: like asking
> "what colour is 1 + 1"?
>
> This is because, as I wrote previously, the primary issue in Dreamtime
> stories is NOT "did it happen" but "is it so"?
>
> So, like their non-Christian ancestors with the traditional Dreamings,
> Aboriginal Christian focus primarily on the MEANING of the Genesis text and
> NOT whether it can be mapped onto history. They see the Genesis creation
> account as a story declaring the eternal (i.e. timeless and ongoing)
> creative activity of God.
>
> I never claimed this was a 'new' point of view, by the way - quite the
> opposite, in fact. What I'm claiming is that it's an OLD point of view which
> probably has more in common with the ANE understanding of the text than the
> sort of readings typically put forward by modern western exegetes of
> Genesis. Actually, it's interesting to note that such approaches to the text
> are pretty much in accordance with the way in which contemporary biblical
> studies is heading.
>
> Please restrict your response to a succinct answer of half a sentence or
> less.
>
> Blessings,
> Murray.
>
> Dehler, Bernie wrote:
> > Hi Pastor Murray- I'm trying to understand your "dreaming" application to
> Genesis. I see lots of generalities from you, but really nothing specific.
> Just to narrow it down, and to be blunt, and to the point, let me focus on
> just one issue/question.
> >
> > At the last ASA conference, Ted Davis gave a presentation regarding how
> to teach the different views on origins... interpreting Genesis. There is
> the YEC, OEC, TE, ID, etc. views. From what I gather, you are saying there
> is a new and unique way to interpret Genesis that has never been before
> considered, called "Aboriginal Dreaming." Please answer this one specific
> question: "How does "dreaming" interpret 'day' in the Genesis account of
> creation in Gen. ch. 1: Day is 24 hr, day-age, figurative, or other?"
> >
> > Please give a succinct answer in 1 or 2 paragraphs (5 to 10 sentences).
> Please no essay-length response or sermon.
> >
> > I'm just trying to understand your point about the application of
> "dreaming" to the interpretation of Genesis.
> >
> > ...Bernie
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> >
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jan 7 15:16:33 2009