The Documentary Hypothesis

[Daniel]

This is from Dr. James F. McGrath's blog, Exploring Our Matrix.  I'm curious what you think about the ideas presented.  Does Genesis, for example, do the same thing?  Are there changes in the language and what words that are used that support different sources of authorship or different times of writing?  I'm not as up on this topic as I'd like to be and would appreciate your thoughts...

[Scott]

Bit -

 

There's an image from the Hubble telescope that shows us perfectly formed galaxies up to 14 billion lightyears away...which is pretty close to how old scientists believe the universe is. How can we see perfectly formed galaxies then? We should be seeing them forming.

 

I'm not sure this is a solid argument, though I am no scientist. I would ask - How do we know these galaxies are perfectly formed? We have only been observing them for a few decades (or at least what we can observe billions of light years away giving the light time to travel here). How is that short time giving enough time to discern whether they are still forming or not? And if they are perfectly formed, what if that has only been in the past 10,000 years, which is only a blip of time in the longer span? So maybe they have been forming for the past 13+ billion years.

 

And I do believe these men, or at least the one's I read and engage with, are submitted to God and his truth in Scripture.

[Daniel]

Bit Brush said:

There's an image from the Hubble telescope that shows us perfectly formed galaxies up to 14 billion lightyears away...which is pretty close to how old scientists believe the universe is. How can we see perfectly formed galaxies then? We should be seeing them forming.

What trusted source is saying we DON'T see them forming?

[Daniel]

Bit Brush said:

Some lecturer sometime in the past said, and I'm misquoting and paraphrasing, that science has identified certain laws. One is the law of entropy. Measures the order of something...typically order to disorder. We see a universe in its current state of order which is slowly becoming less ordered. Science strives to find out where the order came from. They are going to fail to assemble an accurate picture of this because of two things. One, they were not there to observe the process. Two, God added matter and energy into our system for 6 days. Like the winding of a clock. What we observe today is what began to unwind on the 7th day. 

In a closed system with nothing and No one adding energy or changing things, things DO devolve. But it is a stray man to suggest that scientists believe that things are changing for the better without any kind of external influence.  They do see outside influences and, if you read any of their arguments against ID, they argue against the idea that "different is better".  They point to things like genetic changes that have resulted in humans LOOSING abilities.  

[Daniel]

Bit Brush said:

Is the earth the center of the universe? Not physically. The earth is the center of God's focus. His physical creation radiated from the earth outward. All that is "out there" exists to the glory of God's and for our benefit. Sometimes I think those men should give up their logic and submit to the truth found in the Bible.

If we only relied on "the truth found in the Bible" and gave up our logic, you wouldn't even be able to make the statements at the beginning of your paragraph.  The statement that we should abandon logic is itself both an argument from logic and something opposed to the "truth of the Bible".  Or should we just tear out those passages that refer to study, meditation, reason, testing, and so forth?

[Bit Brush]

I don't doubt they submit to God. Never said that. I'm concerned about their attitude towards Genesis. Reminds me of a dear friend who has never submitted to the speed limit. It was fun while we were young, but as older adults I feel convicted to abide by the speed limit. Haven't had a speeding ticket since before I was married. Some of the youth my friend leads can look at him and say "Fred" (not his real name) speeds and is cool with that....you see where I'm going? You move from the foundation of Genesis and it is much easier for the house to fall down. Just because we know far more than the ancients doesn't mean we have license to hold a different belief about the creation week or the flood or the sun standing still, etc., than they did. In fact, we should be even more in awe of God's power and authority than the ancients knowing what we know!

ScottL said:

And I do believe these men, or at least the one's I read and engage with, are submitted to God and his truth in Scripture.

[Bit Brush]

Hey, your the technical person here.

Daniel said:

What trusted source is saying we DON'T see them forming?

[Bit Brush]

I don't agree with that at all. God's ways are higher than our ways. If you were able to scale out God's logic, and placed ours in the same scale, we wouldn't even show up. There is enough truth in the Bible to teach, rebuke and perfect a man.

Daniel said:

If we only relied on "the truth found in the Bible" and gave up our logic, you wouldn't even be able to make the statements at the beginning of your paragraph.  The statement that we should abandon logic is itself both an argument from logic and something opposed to the "truth of the Bible".  Or should we just tear out those passages that refer to study, meditation, reason, testing, and so forth?

[Bit Brush]

So you agree with me?

Daniel said:

Bit Brush said:

Some lecturer sometime in the past said, and I'm misquoting and paraphrasing, that science has identified certain laws. One is the law of entropy. Measures the order of something...typically order to disorder. We see a universe in its current state of order which is slowly becoming less ordered. Science strives to find out where the order came from. They are going to fail to assemble an accurate picture of this because of two things. One, they were not there to observe the process. Two, God added matter and energy into our system for 6 days. Like the winding of a clock. What we observe today is what began to unwind on the 7th day. 

In a closed system with nothing and No one adding energy or changing things, things DO devolve. But it is a stray man to suggest that scientists believe that things are changing for the better without any kind of external influence.  They do see outside influences and, if you read any of their arguments against ID, they argue against the idea that "different is better".  They point to things like genetic changes that have resulted in humans LOOSING abilities.  

[Daniel]

I don't see how the fact that God is smarter than we are means that your post wasn't derived largely on logic.

Bit Brush said:

I don't agree with that at all. God's ways are higher than our ways. If you were able to scale out God's logic, and placed ours in the same scale, we wouldn't even show up. There is enough truth in the Bible to teach, rebuke and perfect a man.

Daniel said:

If we only relied on "the truth found in the Bible" and gave up our logic, you wouldn't even be able to make the statements at the beginning of your paragraph.  The statement that we should abandon logic is itself both an argument from logic and something opposed to the "truth of the Bible".  Or should we just tear out those passages that refer to study, meditation, reason, testing, and so forth?

[Daniel]

I'm saying that you are right in saying that external influences negate entropy.  But those evil evolutionists believe in external influences as well...theirs may be natural OR supernatural though.  As such, the entropy argument doesn't mean much to them.  Sounds really good, and the ID folks really love it, but "secular" science accounts for that.

Bit Brush said:

So you agree with me?

Daniel said:

Bit Brush said:

Some lecturer sometime in the past said, and I'm misquoting and paraphrasing, that science has identified certain laws. One is the law of entropy. Measures the order of something...typically order to disorder. We see a universe in its current state of order which is slowly becoming less ordered. Science strives to find out where the order came from. They are going to fail to assemble an accurate picture of this because of two things. One, they were not there to observe the process. Two, God added matter and energy into our system for 6 days. Like the winding of a clock. What we observe today is what began to unwind on the 7th day. 

In a closed system with nothing and No one adding energy or changing things, things DO devolve. But it is a stray man to suggest that scientists believe that things are changing for the better without any kind of external influence.  They do see outside influences and, if you read any of their arguments against ID, they argue against the idea that "different is better".  They point to things like genetic changes that have resulted in humans LOOSING abilities.  

[Bit Brush]

Simple. We've gotten too big for our britches. Simply because we can boldly say that earth only means the ground that Noah could see doesn't mean there was no global catastrophe as the Bible states. This, despite the theological implications for such a statement boogles my mind. My logic tends to lead me this way. God said it, it must be true. God says to look around and see evidence of his work. I can see it. My logic has been surrendered to God. The truth of the Bible won't lead me astray. It doesn't embarrass me if it doesn't stack up to what the world says or even well meaning christian scientists might say in contradiction. If I'm called a fool believing that God created it all in 6 days, so be it. If I alienate the scientific community because I believe that the properties of the universe, even spoken in passing, are correct and true despite what current science says, that's not my problem. I don't adjust my belief system based on the world.

The world sees a universe that "appears" to be billions of years old with the earth that "appears" to be millions of years old. It all had to be formed and ready to support life in the week God created all things. Now if God can do that, placing moons, planets, stars and galaxies fully formed with their light falling on the earth for us to behold, he can do anything. Neither my intelligence nor logic are insulted. I have surrendered those things as well as my vain imaginations to God and his Word. The Word is the final authority on how it began.

The logic God gave us is to be used as a tool to help us. One of the best things we can do to help us is to discover God. Once you've discovered him, the best way to continue is to surrender all things to him. He will give us the protection, knowledge and means necessary for the path that he's set for us. 

Daniel said:

I don't see how the fact that God is smarter than we are means that your post wasn't derived largely on logic.

[Daniel]

The whole "doesn't mean there was no global catastrophe as the Bible states" bit kinda begs the question, doesn't it?  I agree that the text CAN be understood that way.  But if there was a verse that, for example, spoke of people that survived the flood, I don't think folks would be as adamant about this "must be global" bit if it were listed on the atheist web sites as a glaring contradiction.  We'd be quick to point out that "global" isn't the only understanding of the text.  So when there is a total absence of physical evidence on a global scale for something claimed to have made a tremendous change to the planet, and since there are more than one passage that suggests some survivors, I don't see any reason to be adamant about the extent of it one way or the other.  When we actually follow what the text says to "look around and see what I've done", that just doesn't line up with some of the interpretations of the text - but it DOES line up with others.  Shouldn't that matter?

You've brought up a lot of the typical YEC points in a topic initially created to discuss authorship.  I love discussing this stuff.  But can I suggest that you create new topics in the "creation, flood, and fall" category for these things like global nature of the flood, appearance of age, whether an interpretation of special revelation should trump the overwhelming evidence from general revelation, and so forth?  Even your claim that you are submitting to The Word as the final authority is something that I would challenge.  I believe you believe that, but I don't think that is practically the case and would love to explore that.  But this topic on authorship is not a good one to do all of that because folks not interested in the topic of authorship may be missing out on all these other topics that they feel strongly about.

Bit Brush said:

Simple. We've gotten too big for our britches. Simply because we can boldly say that earth only means the ground that Noah could see doesn't mean there was no global catastrophe as the Bible states. This, despite the theological implications for such a statement boogles my mind. My logic tends to lead me this way. God said it, it must be true. God says to look around and see evidence of his work. I can see it. My logic has been surrendered to God. The truth of the Bible won't lead me astray. It doesn't embarrass me if it doesn't stack up to what the world says or even well meaning christian scientists might say in contradiction. If I'm called a fool believing that God created it all in 6 days, so be it. If I alienate the scientific community because I believe that the properties of the universe, even spoken in passing, are correct and true despite what current science says, that's not my problem. I don't adjust my belief system based on the world.

The world sees a universe that "appears" to be billions of years old with the earth that "appears" to be millions of years old. It all had to be formed and ready to support life in the week God created all things. Now if God can do that, placing moons, planets, stars and galaxies fully formed with their light falling on the earth for us to behold, he can do anything. Neither my intelligence nor logic are insulted. I have surrendered those things as well as my vain imaginations to God and his Word. The Word is the final authority on how it began.

The logic God gave us is to be used as a tool to help us. One of the best things we can do to help us is to discover God. Once you've discovered him, the best way to continue is to surrender all things to him. He will give us the protection, knowledge and means necessary for the path that he's set for us. 

Daniel said:

I don't see how the fact that God is smarter than we are means that your post wasn't derived largely on logic.