A few years ago I was reading Genesis in my Roman Catholic Bible (I
was raised as a catholic and considered myself today an evangelical),
the one with the Vatican Imprimatur on the first page along with a
proclamation of "Partial Indulgence" for reading it for > 30 min or so
:-) (New English Bible?). I was outraged at their interpretation and
illustration of the world seen by the Hebrews, their ancient
cosmology. A flat earth, above: the firmament (or heaven) as a mantle
- like a crystal bowl filled with lights (the stars), below: rocks and
fire, etc. I hated it.
For many years I felt STRONGLY an internal disgust for any other view
than a "biblical" view - which I now know to be the YEC view. I still
have to fight this awesome, strange, and subtle feeling against the
"inferential" sciences that dare tell me too different from what my
mind pictures. Evolution, of course, was completely out of the
question - It just couldn't be true.
With time I accepted (within the 95% confidence interval) the Old
Earth position, but evolution (common descent especially) was/is
something I just cannot swallow well.
This morning I was reading Genesis again in my Geneva Bible [NKJV -
this one doesn't have indulgences :-( ] . Well, I've been going over
and over Genesis for several years. But this morning I was convinced
that the truths therein are of a religious/theological nature, and
that the whole narrative is aimed to the understanding of people of
the time. It is actually an excellent catechism that a child can
learn in 7 days. It is structured, it does not preclude the
possibility of bioevolution, establishes key doctrines of the faith,
etc. I was convinced I could not and should not give it a literal
interpretation. In fact, a literal interpretation throughout the
Bible can lead one to serious problems.
It was, nevertheless, the ID movement that help me identify the source
of that negative reaction I had against the "inferential" sciences -
that terrible feeling which always led me to deny any version of
creation except species created de novo. The problem is, now clearly
obvious to me, the continuous, emphatic, dogmatic, philosophical,
metaphysical, arrogant, and irresponsible, "scientifically based"
dicta of the atheistic scientists. Now that I have recognized the
problem as an illegitimate "JUMP" made by scientists from
"inferential" science to philosophy of reality, I feel much better and
see much clearer. I believe that this is exactly what makes the
YEC/ICR position and the books of Dr. Johnson so appealing to the
evangelical American mind. They want to hear/read whatever supports
their faith philosophically.
Don't get me wrong, I still doubt most of evolution. A progressive
"evolutive" creation is much more appealing to me now - that may
change as my eyes are now open and I don't agonize over trying to fit
every new finding of science into a rigid framework. I believe
Darwinism, the science and the philosophy of it, can not account for
the whole of life we see today and the fossil record we have managed
to gather. Dr. Gould has recognized this very same issue and exploits
it as much as the YECs and the OECs do. I believe that there is more
to evolution that mutations + natural selection. However, I do not
deny that it was possible for God to direct evolution even through
"natural means". Humankind today can "create" new species, why
couldn't have God done similarly naturally.
Well, after all, my Roman Catholic Bible may have had a correct
commentary of Genesis. I shall go back and re-read it (and get some
indulgence for it :-> at the same time). At any rate, I think that if
we can help others see that "Science" is not the same as those
"philosophical affirmations" of atheistic scientists, which do indeed
threaten the moral fiber of this post-modern and post-Christian world,
we would be doing a great service to all believers. Therefore,
instead of trying to convince other believers of evolution (which is
too difficult to do even among biological scientists), specially of
evolution as a "fact", which at best is also a "leap" of faith, let us
discuss with them about the reasons behind those very strong feelings
they have against all versions of creation but the literally given by
Genesis, and let's try to tell them with great love whence and
wherefore those feeling emanate - from the hearts of unbelievers and
not from the truthful findings of Science.
Salutis
Eduard GMoros
PS: from my new "centralized" email address.
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com