RE: ICR - Jan 2005

Charles,

Like it or not, the "best that scholarship can afford" is a loaded
phrase, especially when it comes to Biblical studies. No doubt my
comments here will ruffle some feathers, but I think Glenn is on to
something that runs very deep.

We must recognize that, especially since the Enlightenment, there are
at least two kinds of Biblical (and religious) scholarship. Label
them how you will: skeptical vs. believing, liberal vs.
fundamentalist, but the general idea is doing one's scholarship in a
spirit of submission and belief to scripture as God's Word vs. not.
Here "the laity" is on to something significant. This is not just
about winning the war or pleasing the masses. This is about godly,
spirit-filled people recognizing whether or not someone or some
viewpoint is fundamentally of faith or not.

Now I'm all for rising above petty pigeon-holing, but we must
recognize that much of the "best that scholarship can afford" comes
from the unbelieving side and is filled with presuppositions that are
contrary to centuries of Christian belief.

If I "have" to choose between evangelical belief and liberal
scholarship, I will choose evangelical belief. If everything I read
about theistic evolution/evolutionary creation is built upon
"unbelieving liberal scholarship", then I'm going to be suspicious. I
think that Glenn is right--we must discuss these issues in light of
evangelical belief (unless we're not there ourselves) if we want
those who share that evangelical belief to listen to us.

For example, my view scripture "ontologically" is probably identical
to YEC's and some of the most strong-minded "inerrantists". And I'm
not afraid to say that. I think that scripture itself teaches that
view. To say that gives me some credibility in the evolution
discussion that I might not otherwise have (and I don't just say it
to have credibility). Although in my heresy trial, I was charged with
making scripture subject to science, I was acquitted of that charge.

The origins discussion is a matter of interpretation and
hermeneutics. There, there is an acknowledged bit of uncertainty.
Questions such as accommodation, literary styles, nature of
historical narrative, etc. legitimately come into play.

Glenn and I don't always agree on the details of our respective
views--and, it seems (correct me Glenn if I am overstating this) that
I'm much more willing to live with some cognitive dissonance that he
is. But I think we do agree on the importance of clearly stating our
commitments to an "evangelical faith" (and then thinking through them
as consistently as possible).

None of this should be taken to mean that I think that YEC's are
right in their science or their interpretation of scripture or that I
think that there is nothing to be learned from "unbelieving"
scholarship.

TG

>Content-Type: text/html
>Content-Description: HTML
>
>Glenn,
>
>So should we decide that Genesis 1-11 is historical just so that we
>can "win the war" against creationists? Whether or not Gen. 1-11 is
>historical should be decided based on the best that scholarship can
>afford, not whether or not it pleases the laity (who is that in this
>discussion anyway?), should it not? I guess I don't get your point.
>
>For clarity in my mind - what are these views of your that "people
>don't like"?
>
>All the Best,
>Charles
>
><><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><
>Charles W. Carrigan
>Olivet Nazarene University
>Dept. of Geology
>One University Ave.
>Bourbonnais, IL 60914
>PH: (815) 939-5346
>FX: (815) 939-5071
>
>
>
> >>> "Glenn Morton" <mailto:glennmorton@entouch.net> 1/31/2005
>6:16:18 PM >>>glennmorton@entouch.net> 1/31/2005 6:16:18 PM >>
>Yes, we are losing, Burgy. We are losing in my opinion because they
>won't listen to anyone who says that the Bible is not meant to be taken
>historically. Since that is the position of most on this list and in
>the scientific community, we have almost zero impact among the laity. We
>can deny this (like the YECs deny the age of the earth), but the fact is
>there are more YECs today than there were in 1960. People may not like
>my views, but they were designed to address that issue of historicity
>and I have gotten a few YECs to listen when I laid out the theology
>first.

-- 
_________________
Terry M. Gray, Ph.D., Computer Support Scientist
Chemistry Department, Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado  80523
grayt@lamar.colostate.edu  http://www.chm.colostate.edu/~grayt/
phone: 970-491-7003 fax: 970-491-1801