I’m still here, but yet I’m gone
I don’t play guitar or sing my songs
They never defined who I am
The man that loves you ’til the end
You’re the last person I will love
You’re the last face I will recall
And best of all, I’m not gonna miss you
Not gonna miss you
I’m never gonna hold you like I did
Or say I love you to the kids
You’re never gonna see it in my eyes
It’s not gonna hurt me when you cry
I’m never gonna know what you go through
All the things I say or do
All the hurt and all the pain
One thing selfishly remains
I’m not gonna miss you
I’m not gonna miss you
I cannot pretend I am without fear. But my predominant feeling is one of gratitude. I have loved and been loved; I have been given much and I have given something in return; I have read and traveled and thought and written. I have had an intercourse with the world, the special intercourse of writers and readers.
Above all, I have been a sentient being, a thinking animal, on this beautiful planet, and that in itself has been an enormous privilege and adventure.
i bump into the hiddenness of God often when i think about science.
now convince all the scientists in the world that your God should be their God.
at the same time get the same amount of work done in science.
see the problem?
we will fight over God forever but we can agree what is science and cooperate at that level
if and only if no one can put their God at the center of science.
that is why biology is basically the same around the world but two churches side by side can’t agree on much of anything.
it is the great genius of modern science to get out of the God discussion business altogether.
the really curious thing is why can’t we see God? the hiddenness of God is not something most theologians in 1700 thought would happen.
they thought we would see heaven with telescopes or see the hand of God at the smallest level in living things.
this is the heart of paley’s design argument.
the thing that bugs me in this discussion is why can we see some signature of God in the natural world?
i don’t see anything in the Bible to prepare us for such a deep hiddenness.
there are a couple of lutheran theologians on my reading list on the topic but i don’t know when i’ll get to them.
exactly how do you see the hand of God in the heavens?
i’ve thought of ways God could have signed life but i’ve never seen arguments about how God could put some type of divine skywriting so that everyone who understood it would see the God of the Bible.
God could have signed life in such a way that by 1980 no biologist could deny that human life was created by God separate from all other living things. very simply very convincingly.
there were theologians in the 19th C that predicted such a signal from God.
but we’ve never seen one.
is it still in humanities future?
It’s worth remembering that true empirical science is measurable, testable, repeatable, and observable. Therefore evolutionary theories require at least as much blind faith as the Genesis account, if not more. And yet the wonky religions of Big Bang Cosmology and Darwinian Evolution have done an amazing job of frightening theologians with their façade of pseudo-scientific evidence.
one of the reasons i keep getting into the young earth discussion is that i am fascinated by the structure of arguments and what people find persuasive. take my current reading: http://www.gty.org/Blog/B150217
True biblical scholarship seeks to arrive at exegetical conclusions in conformity with the biblical text, not impose humanistic conclusions upon the text, thus changing its meaning.
nothing is in conformity with any text. the text is just marks on paper, what he means is conformity with the system of his biblical hermeneutic community, to his way of reading the text. he completely misses the fact that people in community read a text, the text does not simply exist emitting meaning directly into the brains of a passerby. it is interpreted during the active process of reading. the passive text just sitting on the desk has no meaning. every reader “imposes” meaning during her reading, that is simply what it means to be reading, to derive meaning from markings on paper.