Mathematical books should be evaluated mathematically, literary works with literary competence, scientific works with specialized professional knowledge. Similarly, religious writings must be approached from a well-defined religious perspective, especially when it’s about writings containing the foundations of a religion. A biblical exegesis that presents itself as predominantly “scientific” goes on an irrelevant wrong track, because this book deals with the relationship between God and man and its history. It basically belongs to the domain of knowledge of the spiritual, which by definition cannot be explored scientifically. The historical components of the Bible can, of course, be subjected to critical evaluation, but without falling into a “scientific simplism” in which everything for which no scientific causation is known is automatically set aside as unhistorical.
When Moses, a key figure of the Bible, saw a bush on fire without being consumed by the fire, it aroused his “scientific” interest. He had acquired this intellectual mindset at the Egyptian court. His reaction was justified, because it was a curious phenomenon that sometimes occurs in dry and warm areas and has a scientific explanation. It could possibly be a Dictamnus albus, which secretes a gas that can sometimes flare up, without damage to the plant. However, his down-to-earth attitude was also open to what on the one hand exceeds our knowledge capacity and on the other hand touches us in our deepest being. This requires both humility and openness and allows a person to get in touch with the hidden Reality that carries and guides everything and exceptionally even speaks directly to someone, as was the case with Moses.
Through this example of “believing realism” of this great biblical figure, we want to be inspired by the analyses we make in this section.
Forumcatholicum 