Does James Webb debunk Big Bang?

I see both of these combined in the parable we call “The Prodigal Son” (which I think of as “The Parable of the Insanely Gracious Father”) in the son as he struggles with going home: desire for that intimacy and terror it might not happen, that there is no inheritance for him and thus no welcome.
But my view of that parable was skewed long ago by Luther; as long as I can remember I’ve reckoned that when the father gave an inheritance to that wayward son the father’s estate was not diminished, so there was always still an inheritance waiting for the younger son.

That’s what happens when someone who sees the world from a legal perspective does theology.

I was reading an article by a physicist who maintains that everything in the universe is made up of fields, and it occurred to me that from that perspective we could think of God as the über-feld, the “super field” which sustains all the ‘mundane’ fields. That would make God both infinitely removed and intimately close.
It sounds close to gnosticism’s emanations, except it doesn’t require any emanating, only being.

1 Like

Calvinism has a fair amount of focus on God’s love. Legalism, which is possible coming from anywhere on other theological spectra, would lead to terror. But the Bible brings out both the awe and the friendliness.

2 Likes

As far as the authorship of Moses - if Genes1s 1&2 are divine revelation, how does it make any difference whether Moses, rather than some person or persons unknown, is the human author?

1 Like

It makes no practical difference, except maybe:

  1. It undermines the claim that Moses “must be the author” if there’s no practical difference.
  2. It eliminates what might be the productive investigation into multiple sources (e.g., reading Genesis 1, especially, as a polemic against competing cosmogonies).

I’ve come to realize that a lot of people hold a particular view of scripture that is completely circular—e.g., scripture is trustworthy because this particular interpretation is actually possible (likely?) because of what I believe about God (and scripture) therefore scripture is trustworthy.

The result is a confidence in scripture that tends to bypass what it actually says and means. In other words, all Genesis 1-2 tells me (or all the book of Jonah tells me) is that I can really on Jesus’ historical crucifixion and resurrection.

Or whether it is “history”.