RE: A Third Method of Apology

I wish only to comment on the following:

3. Genesis 1-11 may be understood as allegory, poetry, mythology, or
tradition.
 

This would be what contributes to it's success.

We have Biblical evidence.

            This is supposed just tradition, a drama/near
tragedy/adventure with flawed heroes.

We have historical evidence.

            This is supposed just mythology, a fantasy visionary quest
of healing.

We have scientific evidence.

            This is supposed just allegory, science-fiction against
horrors/suffering in Spiritual Realms .

We have mathematical evidence ( odds of patterns ) .

            This is supposed just poetry in motion, comedy/musical
irony, against impossible odds.

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Dick Fischer
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 11:04 AM
To: ASA
Subject: A Third Method of Apology

I would like to solicit your comments, online or off, on this proposal
to launch a third method of apology I call a "moderate method" in
contradistinction from the conservative method and liberal method
currently in use. Of course, these are generalizations, and not
intended to represent every shade of belief.

Predominantly, Christians use one of two methods of apology, and
Christians tend to be polarized between these opposite extremes.
 
Characteristics of Conservative Method
 
1. Genesis 1-11 is interpreted as the factual history of the creation
of all mankind.

2. A "literal" interpretation of Genesis 1-11 is advocated, but flawed
by inconsistent exegesis.

3. The Bible alone is seen as sufficient for all understanding.

4. The Bible is seen as inerrant either as translated or in the
original manuscripts.

5. KJV is given priority as the preferred English translation.

6. The "days" of creation are seen as 24-hour periods.

7. Adam is considered the progenitor of the human race who lived
approximately 6,000 years ago.

8. The fossil record was distributed by a global flood.

9. All the world's languages commenced at the tower of Babel.

10. History is ignored and science is subverted to align with flawed
biblical interpretation.
 
Characteristics of Liberal Method
 
1. Genesis 1-11 is interpreted as a theological presentation of human
creation.

2. Adam represents the first human being who may have lived over
100,000 years ago, or didn't live at all.

3. Genesis 1-11 may be understood as allegory, poetry, mythology, or
tradition.
 
4. Genesis 1-11 has theological value, but is considered to be
factually flawed.

5. A relationship with Christ guides our understanding as the Holy
Spirit reveals what is important.

6. Biblical interpretation is a matter of faith, though influenced by
the revelations of science.

7. The Bible is considered to be authoritative and divinely inspired,
though not inerrant.

8. NIV usually is the preferred English translation.

9. The "days" of creation in Genesis 1 are considered as "day-age" and
realigned.

10. Modern science generally is taken at full face value, and Bible and
science are reconciled by subordinating Scripture.

Characteristics of Moderate Method

1. Genesis 1-11 is considered the factual history of the Semites, not
the entire human race.

2. A literal interpretation of Genesis 1-11 is preferred using sound,
consistent exegesis, and mindful of archaic Hebrew language.

3. Scripture is inerrant in the autographs, but suffers currently from
errors in transmission, translation, and interpretation.

4. KJV is preferred, though needs revision in light of historical
evidence.

5. The "days" of creation are seen as days of God's time, not man's
time.

6. Adam is considered to be the federal head of the human race, the
biological head of the Semitic race, and the first to receive God's
covenant.

7. Faith alone has proved insufficient for understanding.

8. Scripture can be clarified by Scripture, and Bible interpreters
should consider revelations of modern science and ancient history.

9. Impartial, unbiased data and evidence should guide us in formulating
theories of understanding, both theological and scientific.

10. Scientific theories are best left to credentialed scientists, and
modern science poses no threat to Genesis 1-11, correctly interpreted.

Again, what do you think? Please realize that I have compiled a wealth
of historical data to support this method.

Also, if your church group, seminary, university, or Christian
organization would like to see a live and in person Power Point
presentation on "Historical Genesis: From Adam to Abraham," let me know
- offline, please. Bags packed, will travel.

Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
www.genesisproclaimed.org
<http://www.genesisproclaimed.org/>
Received on Mon Aug 9 11:41:53 2004