Episode 21: Categories of Poetic Language & Phenomenological Perspective

Loading...

En provenance du cours de University of Alberta

Science & Religion 101

31 note

University of Alberta

Science & Religion 101

31 note

This course examines the nature of both science and religion and attempts to explore the possible relationships between them. The primary purpose is to dispel the popular myth that science and religion are entrenched in a never-ending conflict. As a result, this course argues that if the limits of both science and religion are respected, then their relationship can be complementary. Topics include: Science and Religion Categories and Foundational Principles, Definitions of Science and Religion, Science-Religion Models and Relationships, Intelligent Design and Natural Revelation, the Galileo Affair, Geology and Noah’s Flood, Evolution and Darwin’s Religious Beliefs, the Modern “Evolution” vs. “Creation” Debate, the Problem of Evil, and Interpretations of the Biblical Accounts of Origins in Genesis 1-11. The course employs a Constructive Teaching Style in order that students can develop their personal views on the relationship between science and religion and on each of the topics listed above. St. Joseph's College is a Catholic, undergraduate, liberal arts college on the University of Alberta campus. It is an independent institution that is affiliated with the University of Alberta.

À partir de la leçon

Categories & Principles II & III

In this final section on Categories and Principles, we will consider foundational and religious epistemological (theory of knowledge) categories. In particular, does a belief in God, or a lack of belief in God, impact the step of faith or intellect jump in the Metaphysics-Physics Principle? This week also introduces the second foundational principle of this course termed “The Message-Incident Principle.” This is a hermeneutical principle for interpreting religious texts dealing with statements about the natural world. In order to develop a peaceful relationship between Science and Religion, it is critical to understand that religious texts like the Bible feature an ancient understanding of nature (i.e., an ancient science). During this week we also outline the basic positions on the origin of the universe and life—Young Earth Creation, Progressive Creation, Evolutionary Creation, Deistic Evolution, and Dysteleological Evolution.

Episode 14: Philosophy: Epistemological Categories4:54

Episode 15: Philosophy: Epistemological Categories (Continued)6:16

Episode 16: Philosophy: Epistemological Categories (Continued)6:01

Episode 17: Hermeneutical Categories5:40

Episode 18: Eisegesis, Exegesis & Hermeneutical Horizons8:46

Episode 19: Hermeneutical Gaps & Biblical Inerrancy5:33

Episode 20: Categories of Biblical Statements7:16

Episode 21: Categories of Poetic Language & Phenomenological Perspective4:57

Episode 22: Categories of Biblical Concordism & Correspondence6:45

Episode 23: The Message-Incident Principle & Origins Debate: General Categories6:25

Episode 24: Origins Debate: General Categories (Continued)6:39

Episode 25: Origins Debate: Specific Categories5:34

Episode 26: Practical Considerations5:43

Episode 27: Conclusion: Categories & Principles 1-35:08

Episode 28: Conclusion: Categories & Principles 1-3 (Continued)3:11

Hebrew Alphabet8:34

Rencontrer les enseignants

Denis Lamoureux
Associate Professor
St. Joseph's College

Episode 21.

Continuing with our discussion of the poetic language argument, it's important

to understand that there are different categories of poetic language.

For example, there are fanciful figures of speech in poetry.

In Isaiah 55, we read, all the trees of the field will clap their hands.

Now, do trees have hands?

I doubt anyone reads this verse literally.

There are also references to physical reality in poetry.

Psalm 74 states, God established the sun and moon, and

he set all the boundaries of the Earth.

Does anyone want to write off the reality of the sun, moon, and

Earth because they appear in poetry?

I doubt it.

Poetry also has scientific metaphors to depict physical reality.

For example, in Isaiah 40, God stretches out the heavens like

a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

If we return to our diagram of the three-tier universe on pag6 of the handouts, we

can understand how this verse in Isaiah 40 makes perfect sense to an ancient person.

A tent depicts the ancient science of the three-tier universe, with a domed canopy

in heaven overhead, and a flat floor of the tent representing the flat Earth below.

It's important to note that the use of metaphors is part of science today.

For example, we often refer to a magnetic field which uses

the agricultural idea of a farmer's field to depict the force of a magnet.

To conclude, in order to interpret passages in the Bible that are poetry,

we need first to determine the type of poetic language being used by the author.

For me, Philippians 2 is referring to physical reality and the ancient

understanding that the universe was made up of three physical tiers.

Another well-known, common hermeneutical response to conflicts between

the Bible and science is the phenomenological perspective argument.

The Greek noun phenomenon simply means appearance.

This argument claims that statements about nature in the Bible

are from the perspective of what they look like to the natural senses, for

example, the naked eye.

They're only phenomenological and merely visual effects.

In fact, check any newspaper today and you will find the times for sunrise and

sunset, but everyone knows that the sun does not literally rise or set.

Therefore, do not take these statements literally.

This argument is a little bit more sophisticated and closer to the truth.

But we need to ask a critical question.

When ancient people used the words sunrise and

sunset, did they use these in the same way that we do today?

And the answer is no.

And the proof of this comes from history and the Galileo Affair.

Up to the 1600s, people believed the Sun literally moved across

the sky every day, and that the Earth literally did not move.

Therefore, we need to distinguish two different categories

of phenomenological perspective.

The first is the ancient phenomenological perspective.

What ancient people saw, they believed was actual,

such as the Sun actually moves across the sky every day and

that the Earth actually did not move.

In contrast, through our modern phenomenological perspective,

what we see with our eyes, we understand to be only an appearance.

The so-called movement of the Sun is only an appearance and

a visual effect caused by the Earth's rotation.

And the so-called immovability of the Earth is only

an appearance and a sensory effect caused by gravity.

To conclude, if you write off statements in the Bible, like the sun rising and

the sun setting, as merely an appearance, then you are reading

your modern phenomenological perspective into the Bible,

and of course, that is eisegesis.

Instead, when reading an ancient text, we need to think like an ancient person.

End of episode.

Explorer notre catalogue

Rejoignez-nous gratuitement et obtenez des recommendations, des mises à jour et des offres personnalisées.

Coursera propose un accès universel à la meilleure formation au monde, en partenariat avec des universités et des organisations du plus haut niveau, pour proposer des cours en ligne.

© 2019 Coursera Inc. Tous droits réservés.

Télécharger dans l'App Store

Disponible sur Google Play