'How I wonder what you are?' A powerful exposition of the same awe inspired in David, in light of our deeper apprehension (yet still without full comprehension) of what he was staring up towards. I do subscribe to Peter's view that, 'men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit' who wants us to feel the vastness and mystery and have the humility to ask big questions.
Yes! A friend said to me recently that you either place your Faith in God or in science. Why? It seems to me that if you think in terms like that, God is awfully small and limited.
He seemed to be using the words photon and proton interchangeably. That’s where I lost him a little as I wasn’t sure which he meant. I THINK he might have just been meaning to talk about protons, which are sub-atomic particles.
@@connormignault4748 So he identifies his view of Scripture as the humble one (thanks for pointing that out, btw, we might not have noticed otherwise), with the clear implication that the other view is arrogant. The other view, which would be that of the original faculty of Westminster Seminary, is that God speaks clearly in Scripture (though of course some sections require work to pull the full meaning out) and that it is our part to humbly listen and obey. Therefore, to reject that clear revelation in favor of positing confusion and aporia would be arrogance. Enns however thinks THAT view is the unhumble, arrogant one because of his man-centered presupposition of evolution, epochs, and struggle.
@@timharris2291 Actually, it is the biblical Fundamentalist's view that's "man-centered". Peter Enns whole point is that science seems to be suggesting that we aren't at or even near the center of the universe, unlike the assumptions of the biblical authors.
Peter never really gives any kind of answer as to ‘what our strange universe is telling us’. That’s because he likes questions more than answers, and even more than the word of God which he does not preach from. He almost never mentions Jesus or the gospel. I knew a pastor who got into Peter and Brian McLaren’s teachings and eventually loved ‘questions’ more than the Bible. He eventually questioned the very resurrection of Jesus, without which there is NO gospel.
There's really no avoiding questions if we are being honest with ourselves. We as humans are not omniscient and there are multiple ways of interpreting any given thing, let alone something as boundary-breaking as the life and resurrection of Jesus. This doesn't mean that we can't have beliefs and convictions, but it does mean that there will likely be a tension that we always feel between what we choose to commit ourselves to and all of the thoughts, doubts, questions, curiosities and wonderings that we think and experience as we go through our lives. At 18:50, Pete states somewhat succinctly how he thinks the universe on a grand scale communicates the glory of God: the bizarreness and incomprehensibility of the universe shows us how much bigger the universe is, as well as its creator, than our own understanding. The universe (and pretty much all of reality) is less something we understand, fit into our little boxes, and ultimately control, and it is more a mystery that we are swimming in and that we strangely get to participate in and experience.
Nonsense. Everyone knows the earth is around 4,000 years old. Make America great again. Sorry about that, just kidding. I came upon a photo of Donald Trump signing Bibles. True. His signature looks like the expression AAAAAARG.
Can’t get enough of Peter’s talks, amazing stuff, thank you!
Pete is a theological rock star!!!
There are no words to even express how much I love this.
'How I wonder what you are?' A powerful exposition of the same awe inspired in David, in light of our deeper apprehension (yet still without full comprehension) of what he was staring up towards. I do subscribe to Peter's view that, 'men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit' who wants us to feel the vastness and mystery and have the humility to ask big questions.
Love this. Thank you. Knowing we don't know is humility. And humility is necessary for us to rest in God... an act of surrender.
Excellent!
Refreshing
Awesome! Thanks!
This is why we love Faith Matters.
Great insight
Thank you! Such fun!
Yes! A friend said to me recently that you either place your Faith in God or in science. Why? It seems to me that if you think in terms like that, God is awfully small and limited.
He seemed to be using the words photon and proton interchangeably. That’s where I lost him a little as I wasn’t sure which he meant. I THINK he might have just been meaning to talk about protons, which are sub-atomic particles.
Whats your point scott
I guess the same attitude can be seen as humble or arrogant depending on the underlying presupposition.
what do you mean?
@@connormignault4748 So he identifies his view of Scripture as the humble one (thanks for pointing that out, btw, we might not have noticed otherwise), with the clear implication that the other view is arrogant. The other view, which would be that of the original faculty of Westminster Seminary, is that God speaks clearly in Scripture (though of course some sections require work to pull the full meaning out) and that it is our part to humbly listen and obey. Therefore, to reject that clear revelation in favor of positing confusion and aporia would be arrogance. Enns however thinks THAT view is the unhumble, arrogant one because of his man-centered presupposition of evolution, epochs, and struggle.
@@timharris2291 Actually, it is the biblical Fundamentalist's view that's "man-centered". Peter Enns whole point is that science seems to be suggesting that we aren't at or even near the center of the universe, unlike the assumptions of the biblical authors.
Peter never really gives any kind of answer as to ‘what our strange universe is telling us’. That’s because he likes questions more than answers, and even more than the word of God which he does not preach from. He almost never mentions Jesus or the gospel. I knew a pastor who got into Peter and Brian McLaren’s teachings and eventually loved ‘questions’ more than the Bible. He eventually questioned the very resurrection of Jesus, without which there is NO gospel.
There's really no avoiding questions if we are being honest with ourselves. We as humans are not omniscient and there are multiple ways of interpreting any given thing, let alone something as boundary-breaking as the life and resurrection of Jesus. This doesn't mean that we can't have beliefs and convictions, but it does mean that there will likely be a tension that we always feel between what we choose to commit ourselves to and all of the thoughts, doubts, questions, curiosities and wonderings that we think and experience as we go through our lives.
At 18:50, Pete states somewhat succinctly how he thinks the universe on a grand scale communicates the glory of God: the bizarreness and incomprehensibility of the universe shows us how much bigger the universe is, as well as its creator, than our own understanding. The universe (and pretty much all of reality) is less something we understand, fit into our little boxes, and ultimately control, and it is more a mystery that we are swimming in and that we strangely get to participate in and experience.
Nonsense. Everyone knows the earth is around 4,000 years old. Make America great again. Sorry about that, just kidding. I came upon a photo of Donald Trump signing Bibles. True. His signature looks like the expression AAAAAARG.
The universe appears to be telling us that a god is nowhere to found and that faith is not a reliable pathway to the truth.