1. Activist Feedback
2. Essay: Science and the Bible, part 1
3. This Week’s Sermon from Rev. Frank and Mary
Hoffman
1. Activist Feedback
Taylor, who leafleted the Women of Faith Conference 9/10-11 in
Anaheim, CA, writes:
It went pretty well, and Marisa and I each handed out a box of
leaflets. I would like to donate to Compassion Over Killing!
[The CVA will contribute $18/hr for up to two hours to the veg. or
animal protection group of each volunteer’s choice. Popular choices have
included Vegan Outreach, Compassion Over Killing, Mercy for Animals, and
the Christian Vegetarian Association.]
Upcoming Activist Opportunities
2. Essay: Science and the Bible, part 1
There are many ways in which the findings of scientific research
have seemed to contradict the Bible. For example, there are passages
that indicate that the sun orbits the earth (Joshua 10:13;
Ecclesiastes 1:5), and the Church put Galileo at house arrest and
burned Bruno at the stake for arguing otherwise. Likewise, there is
overwhelming evidence from a range of scientific disciplines that
the earth is far older than the roughly 7000 years indicated by a
literal reading of the Bible. Is it possible to reconcile science
and religion?
Everyone recognizes that there are parts of the Bible that should
not be taken literally. All Christians agree that some of the
biblical descriptions should be regarded as metaphors. As John
Dominic Crossan has said, “Jesus may be the Lamb of God, but that
doesn’t mean that Mary had a Little Lamb.” However, it is often
unclear when the Biblical text is meant to describe historical facts
and when it is meant to convey messages using metaphor. Differences
of opinion as to what is historical and what is metaphorical have
accounted for greatly different interpretations of the Bible among
faithful Christians. I’ve heard it said, tongue in cheek, that
liberal Christians take the Song of Solomon literally and the story
of Jonah metaphorically, and for conservative Christians it’s the
other way around.
Though I think it is fair to say that all Christians revere the
Bible, many Christians have been troubled by certain stories,
particularly stories in which God seems to approve of violence and
destructiveness. Consequently, many Christians have wondered whether
the Bible is completely true, or whether the hand of humanity has
played a role in its construction. In my opinion, the Bible isn’t
false, but I don’t think it is completely true. My reasoning is
based on the observation that no story is completely true. Every
story must omit details that, if the story is well told, are
relatively less important. For example, consider the story of the
Good Samaritan who cared for a man who was badly injured by robbers.
We are told nothing about the Good Samaritan’s personality, which
might have strongly influenced his decision to help the man.
Likewise, we don’t know what his past interactions with Jews,
positive and negative, had been. We also don’t know all the motives
of the priest and the Levite who choose not to assist the injured
man. These facts are evidently not essential to the main message of
the story, but they are essential if we want to understand fully the
motives of those who did or did not help the man. As we try to
discern the meaning of this story for us as readers, the text does
not provide all the details we might want, including the following:
Who besides the lawyer was present? Was the attitude of listeners
one of interest, skepticism, or something else? What was the tone of
the lawyer’s voice and what was his facial expression? What was
Jesus’ tone and facial expression? Did the people in the crowd
regard Jesus as having greater or lesser stature than the lawyer?
Complete answers to these questions would offer further insight into
what the story meant for those present and, presumably, for us
today.
If no story is completely true, then those seeking greater
insight and understanding must seek other sources that complement
the story. Sometimes, we can search elsewhere in the Bible for
complementary information, but the Bible as a finite text cannot
cover everything. Indeed, we have libraries with millions of volumes
that attempt, but have not fully succeeded, to describe who we are
as human beings and what is the nature of the world in which we
live. Here is where the social and physical sciences can assist in
our understanding and appreciation of the biblical stories. Indeed,
the biblical stories would make no sense to us without some
understanding of psychology (whether studied formally or intuited by
our interpersonal relationships) and our knowledge of the physical
world. In what ways are the sciences true, and what are their
limitations? What are the implications for scientific insights for
animal issues and vegan and vegetarian issues? I will explore these
questions next week.
Stephen R. Kaufman, M.D.
3. This Week’s Sermon from Rev. Frank and Mary
Hoffman
Daniel, God’s Man in the Field (Part XII)
http://www.all-creatures.org/sermons97/s17sep89.html .