breathilizer

I was thinking about irreducible and redundant complexity just a few seconds ago, and I figured that anything truly written or inspired by God should be irreducibly complex. I know the term is used for biomechanics, but I'd like to hear what people think when they relate it to the literature.

To me, an irreducible complex would simply be "God is," end of story. But the Bible is full of so many stories that I'm supposed to be able to relate to. Of course it does, but it also does not contain stories which I could relate to differently had they been added now. It contains stories with the same basic principles, "be good," "believe in God," "blah blah blah." Since they have such similar principles, doesn't this seem redundant? If devinely inspired literature is going to be redundant, it had better be infinitely redundant. lol. It better tell every damn story there is to tell regardless of the redundant principles.

Cubeless Academian

My favorite example of redundancy in the Bible is Numbers 7. It has this passage:

"His offering was one silver charger, the weight whereof was an hundred and thirty shekels, one silver bowl of seventy shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; both of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meat offering: One golden spoon of ten shekels, full of incense: One young bullock, one ram, one lamb of the first year, for a burnt offering: One kid of the goats for a sin offering: And for a sacrifice of peace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he goats, five lambs of the first year."

repeated word for word TWELVE FUCKING TIMES! What was that Jesus said about "vain repetitions"?

breathilizer

***Edited 2nd paragraph. I really should pay attention to what I type.***

"To me, an irreducible complex Bible would simply be "God is," end of story. But the Bible is full of so many stories that I'm supposed to be able to relate to. Of course I do relate to them, but it could also contain more stories which I could relate to as well. It contains stories with the same basic principles, "be good," "believe in God," "blah blah blah." Since they have such similar principles, don't they seem redundant? If devinely inspired literature is going to be redundant, it had better be infinitely redundant. It better tell every damn story there is to tell regardless of the redundant principles."

Clivedurdle

My ancient New Bible Commentary Revised IVP 1970 Guthrie et al states:

"This chapter, perhaps the longest in the OT, is a montonous repetition of one formula repeated twelve times with a change only in the leader and the tribe.

Such repetition emphasises the very great generosity of the leaders as an example for future generations...

....The concluding verse of the chapter makes the simple declaration that Yahweh spoke with Moses from between the two golden cherubim which restedon the mercy seat when Moses went into the tent of meeting."

Interesting that the right wing evangelists 35 years ago admit monotony!

But beauty is in the eye of the beholder!

FordMadoxBrown

Hello, breathaliser, I don't even know what biomechanics is, so I've no chance of understanding what the concept of irredcible relevance eor whatever is.

But I am quite sure from 40 years raeding the Bible and about it that it was the creation of sincere theologians, including the God they describe in its pages. That is, it is neither God's inerrant word, nor a hoax or a forgery, but a very normal piece of ancient literature.