Re: A profound disturbance found in Yak butter.

Glenn wrote,

<<Paul, consider a primitive tribesman who grows up belieiving that the
Great Green Slug created the earth. He
goes to college, learns science and finds out that his creation story is
factually false. Can he claim that his
God accommodated the message to the scientific views of his primitive
ancestors but that his religion still
teaches true theology?

Can a Mormon do that? An animist?

I am betting you will answer the question cause you have guts.>>

Since you have thrown down the gauntlet while flattering me for my
fortitude, I would surely be breaking some rule of chivalry not to respond.
So...

First of all, the GGS story, at least as you phrased it, lacks a clear
parallel to the divine accommodation in the OT. You say the primitive
tribesman grew up believing “the Great Green Slug created the earth.” That
is a theological statement comparable to Gen 1:1, “Elohim created the
heavens and the earth.” Since it is a theological statement, it lies outside
the possibility of being falsified by science, hence there is no false
science here to accommodate.

At the same time, there are primitive origin stories which mention a god who
pries the solid sky off of the earth. The Rig Veda says, Varuna “pushed away
the dome of the sky” (7.86.1; cf. 10.82.1). This is partially comparable to
Gen 1:6-8 where God creates a solid sky. So, there is false science in both
religions which could be called accommodation by educated believers in those
religions.

But, so what? The accommodation does not prove that Varuna or Elohim or any
other named creator-god did not create the sky. It leaves open the true
answer to Who made the sky?

Concordism can do no better. It rejects the historical-grammatical meaning
of the Bible’s words and twists them around until they agree with modern
science. Could a believer in the Great Green Slug, or Varuna or any other
god do the same thing with their stories? I don’t see why not.

To me it is a simple matter of honesty. I will not take the scientific data
out of context and twist it to agree with Scripture, so I cannot be a YEC. I
will not take the biblical data out of context and twist it to agree with
modern science, so I cannot be a concordist. The beauty of accommodationism
is that you do not have to twist either the Bible or science.

(Believers in the Book of Mormon could theoretically appeal to
accommodation, but I think accommodationism would have to be applied too
extensively to be a practical answer.)

Paul

 
Received on Thu Jun 8 21:06:56 2006