Harmonisations which generally go along with the consensus in the
academic world will leave us with unconvincing stories which are easy
to critique. There is a nettle to be grasped here! I think Glenn
has shown a willingness to be radical - and for that I give him
credit. <<
I firmly believe that only a radical alteration of our views will be able to
accomodate the data science has collected over the past century. I simply
can not see a reason to believe a document purportedly inspired by God which
is so erroneous in its science that a freshman has trouble accomodating the
data he learns. This leaves me with two choices: Either reject the Bible, or
reject the interpretation which is taught. I have chosen the latter path.
Whether my radical solution will be liked by Christians is not at all the
point. The view matches the data and retains the historicity of the
Scripture.That is what is important. There is no value in holding to Biblical
interpretations which have been disproven by observational data. If the data
disproves the view I currently espouse, I will begin a search for an
alternative.
As to whether going along with a consensus in modern academic circles will
leave us with stories that are unconvincing, I am not sure I follow. It
seems to me that the quickest way to have our stories become unconvincing is
to have the observational data against them.
Thanks for giving me credit for being radical, but a radical is doomed to a
life of hardship with few liking him or his views.
I wrote:
> My point in all this, is that a viewpoint which claims to harmonize the
data, should harmonize the data. I do not really understand what the 50,000
year old Adam view accomplishes. None of the above data fits the Biblical
description so what is the point? <<
David Tyler replied:
>>I look forward to the time when harmonisers use Biblical data to
GUIDE our understanding of the archaeological data. Do we
really believe that the Bible brings light to our scholarship? Much
of what passes for harmonisation today seems to lose sight of a
positive view of the Bible as a resource.<<
I have an unfortunate ability on occasion to phrase things poorly. I want
it to be clear that I do believe that the Bible in these early chapters is
history and thus can be used to guide our researches but only if we abandon
the currently widely held view of how to harmonize the Scripture and science.
We NEED a new view. And this is what my book is all about.
glenn
16075 Longvista Dr.
Dallas, Tx 75248