M
MWin
Guest
Can the schism between science and faith be resolved?
What are the historical facts about Jesus? It is evident from the bible that he took over the messianic movement of John the Baptist at the time when John was put in prison (Mark 1:14ff and Matthew 4:17ff). Jesus started his oeuvre by following in John’s footsteps. He baptized people and preached in John’s voice: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” The disciples weren’t all poor and unknowledgeable fishermen. Several of them were already members of the movement, and many were well-to-do. With all likelihood, Peter and Andrew already belonged to the Baptist messianists. Many of Jesus’s disciples must already have been baptized and they probably had great insight into the scripture.
So the Gospels have downplayed John the Baptist’s role and the intellectual level of the disciples. In our scientific age we regard this as a deviation from the truth. But, in fact, the Gospels relate the deeper truth, and thus they give the true picture. If Jesus had been portrayed as second to John, it would have given us a completely fallacious picture. Jesus was second to nobody, not even the emperor of Rome. That’s why we are told that Jesus built his own movement and that he had called his disciples from the unsophisticated and unknowledgeable people. It is truthful to portray the disciples as novices, since they had not yet heard the Gospel of joy. As long as people haven’t assimilated the teaching of Jesus Christ, they all remain at the stage of the novice.
From a complementarian perspective, there is an historical truth and a spiritual truth. Both are valid in their own context. When he felt ripe for entering nirvana the Buddha voluntarily lied down on the side, in a state of transcendental peacefulness. Yet, historical sources say that he died of food poisoning after having eaten at a restaurant (depending on tradition). This is neither a voluntary nor a pleasant way of entering nirvana. Anyway, tradition has it that he forgave the cook before dying. Agaian, there is a spiritual truth and an historical truth. However, the Buddhists seem untroubled by such discrepancies. Historically, people are accustomed to existing in a world without any strong distinction between the sacred and profane. It’s a world where a pronounced spiritual-worldly dichotomy has not yet developed.
In animistic society, the celebrants, at sacred occasions, become one with their totem spirit, often in the guise of an animal. Their spiritual guise is regarded as equally real as their human nature. There is a double-naturedness to reality and there is a double-naturedness to the self. In olden times, the two aspects of reality, although mutually exclusive, weren’t experienced as conflicting, partly because both were accorded their due time, but also because logical contradictions are tolerable to pre-scientific consciousness. They represent different ways of looking upon reality. Such a worldview still prevails among the Australian aborigines who live in the traditional way.
The biblical creation story relates a truth that is complementary to scientific truth. The creation that took place before man’s emergence on the sixth day, is handled concisely. It took only a couple of days. The underlying message is that history only began at the origin of human consciousness, at the day when we became modern human beings. If the whole timeline is laid down, mankind only emerges in the last minutes, from a geological perspective. Although it is historically true, it doesn’t give a truthful picture of this remarkable event, which is comparable to the emergence of Jesus in Galilee. Adam is first man, and Jesus Christ is Second Adam, that is, he is the first man in God’s new creation. In a sense, the emergence of human ego consciousness is a world-creating event. Only at this moment there is full awareness of creation. Only at this point, God begins to truly relate to his creation. So, from a religious perspective, this is where history begins. With the second Adam, God renews his relation to mankind. What took place before, such as the age of dinosaurs, etc., can’t really compare with these world-creating events. That’s why it’s incorrect to argue that the religious authors were mistaken. They looked at reality with different eyes. In fact, the universe is still geocentric, and earth is still in its centre. Nobody can deny that the earth is central, since it means everything to us. The creation myth gives expression to this truth.
Viewed from this perspective, the biblical creation story is true. From the standpoint of faith, history before man can be summarized as five days of divine creation. The authors of the Pentateuch conveyed the spiritual truth, since history only begins at the moment when we become aware of God. So remarkably important is this event. God sees himself through his relation to man, and so mankind mirrors God. The notion that man was created in the image of God relates an important truth. Had they written about the historical and geological truth, things would get the wrong proportions. Similarly, the authors of the Gospels corrected the historical facts in order to convey the real truth, which includes the real moral proportions. In a similar manner, medieval paintings have a value perspective in which important persons look larger than others. Paradoxically, these “improvements” make the Gospels appear authentic, since only real events need to be improved upon.
(continues below)
What are the historical facts about Jesus? It is evident from the bible that he took over the messianic movement of John the Baptist at the time when John was put in prison (Mark 1:14ff and Matthew 4:17ff). Jesus started his oeuvre by following in John’s footsteps. He baptized people and preached in John’s voice: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” The disciples weren’t all poor and unknowledgeable fishermen. Several of them were already members of the movement, and many were well-to-do. With all likelihood, Peter and Andrew already belonged to the Baptist messianists. Many of Jesus’s disciples must already have been baptized and they probably had great insight into the scripture.
So the Gospels have downplayed John the Baptist’s role and the intellectual level of the disciples. In our scientific age we regard this as a deviation from the truth. But, in fact, the Gospels relate the deeper truth, and thus they give the true picture. If Jesus had been portrayed as second to John, it would have given us a completely fallacious picture. Jesus was second to nobody, not even the emperor of Rome. That’s why we are told that Jesus built his own movement and that he had called his disciples from the unsophisticated and unknowledgeable people. It is truthful to portray the disciples as novices, since they had not yet heard the Gospel of joy. As long as people haven’t assimilated the teaching of Jesus Christ, they all remain at the stage of the novice.
From a complementarian perspective, there is an historical truth and a spiritual truth. Both are valid in their own context. When he felt ripe for entering nirvana the Buddha voluntarily lied down on the side, in a state of transcendental peacefulness. Yet, historical sources say that he died of food poisoning after having eaten at a restaurant (depending on tradition). This is neither a voluntary nor a pleasant way of entering nirvana. Anyway, tradition has it that he forgave the cook before dying. Agaian, there is a spiritual truth and an historical truth. However, the Buddhists seem untroubled by such discrepancies. Historically, people are accustomed to existing in a world without any strong distinction between the sacred and profane. It’s a world where a pronounced spiritual-worldly dichotomy has not yet developed.
In animistic society, the celebrants, at sacred occasions, become one with their totem spirit, often in the guise of an animal. Their spiritual guise is regarded as equally real as their human nature. There is a double-naturedness to reality and there is a double-naturedness to the self. In olden times, the two aspects of reality, although mutually exclusive, weren’t experienced as conflicting, partly because both were accorded their due time, but also because logical contradictions are tolerable to pre-scientific consciousness. They represent different ways of looking upon reality. Such a worldview still prevails among the Australian aborigines who live in the traditional way.
The biblical creation story relates a truth that is complementary to scientific truth. The creation that took place before man’s emergence on the sixth day, is handled concisely. It took only a couple of days. The underlying message is that history only began at the origin of human consciousness, at the day when we became modern human beings. If the whole timeline is laid down, mankind only emerges in the last minutes, from a geological perspective. Although it is historically true, it doesn’t give a truthful picture of this remarkable event, which is comparable to the emergence of Jesus in Galilee. Adam is first man, and Jesus Christ is Second Adam, that is, he is the first man in God’s new creation. In a sense, the emergence of human ego consciousness is a world-creating event. Only at this moment there is full awareness of creation. Only at this point, God begins to truly relate to his creation. So, from a religious perspective, this is where history begins. With the second Adam, God renews his relation to mankind. What took place before, such as the age of dinosaurs, etc., can’t really compare with these world-creating events. That’s why it’s incorrect to argue that the religious authors were mistaken. They looked at reality with different eyes. In fact, the universe is still geocentric, and earth is still in its centre. Nobody can deny that the earth is central, since it means everything to us. The creation myth gives expression to this truth.
Viewed from this perspective, the biblical creation story is true. From the standpoint of faith, history before man can be summarized as five days of divine creation. The authors of the Pentateuch conveyed the spiritual truth, since history only begins at the moment when we become aware of God. So remarkably important is this event. God sees himself through his relation to man, and so mankind mirrors God. The notion that man was created in the image of God relates an important truth. Had they written about the historical and geological truth, things would get the wrong proportions. Similarly, the authors of the Gospels corrected the historical facts in order to convey the real truth, which includes the real moral proportions. In a similar manner, medieval paintings have a value perspective in which important persons look larger than others. Paradoxically, these “improvements” make the Gospels appear authentic, since only real events need to be improved upon.
(continues below)
