Re: [asa] The Barr quote

Hi Randy,

The quote by Barr comes from a letter written to David Watson and is
illuminating when read in context:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/6bmz3c

I would draw attention to the notes added by the owner of the site on
which this letter is reproduced - in particular Note 6. Barr
was, as it turns out, an astute enough scholar to know that prior to a
linguistic analysis of Genesis, one has to understand the significance
of genre.

In my view the only strong conclusion one can draw from Barr's remarks
is quite uncontroversial, namely that there is wide agreement amongst OT
scholars with regard to the original author(s) views on origins. It
would, however, be quite wrong to draw from this any conclusion as to
how OT scholars regard that understanding.

 From what little reading I have done on the matter, I believe it to be
correct to suggest that OT scholars would generally be of the view that
the understanding of the original author(s) of scripture do not
determine possible outcomes for Christian exegesis. Or, to put it
another way, such OT scholars as would hold to the view that Genesis is
inspired scripture (not all do) would hold to some notion of sensus
plenior: the view that God intended a deeper meaning in the text which
nuances, to greater or lesser degree, the importance to be placed on the
understanding of the original author(s).

I would, in any case, make the rather obvious point that IF it were the
case that the vast majority of OT scholars were YEC then one would not
find considerable effort expended in YEC literature to debunking the
manifold "errors" of mainstream OT scholarship (errors which arise
by virtue of said scholarship's purported capitulation to evolutionary
theory, no less!). For instance, from the AiG website;

<quote>
The reason most biblical scholars of the past 200 years believe the
creation days are not ordinary days has nothing to do with what the
Bible clearly states in Genesis 1. What’s the reason? It’s because
they’ve been influenced by secular scientists to believe in millions of
years.
(http://preview.tinyurl.com/5qkm9m)
</quote>

Clearly YEC's don't believe that "most" biblical scholars hold to a YEC
view of Genesis -- so I can hardly imagine that Barr thought they did!

Now, in fairness to YEC's at this point, I perhaps misunderstand
precisely their intent in making use of this oft cited extract from
Barr. However, with this caveat I would make the following three
critical remarks;

First, it seems to me that the YEC use of Barr in this context
obfuscates rather than clarifies the issue at hand. If even a goodly
portion of OT scholars shared YEC views then we would see the scholars
themselves quoted, rather than Barr's remarks about their scholarship.
So it seems to me to be the case that appeal to Barr here is an act of
desperation intended to hide the lack of credible contemporary OT
scholars who would agree with the YEC interpretation of Genesis.

Second, it seems to me to border on the disingenuous for YEC's to seek
credibility for their views by appeal to OT scholarship via the quoting
of Barr when they in fact know - as demonstrated by their own remarks on
the subject - that contemporary OT scholarship does NOT share YEC views
on origins.

Third, I cannot regard Barr's remarks as relevant to the issue at hand
in any case - not because Barr's remarks are ill-informed, but because
he was speaking of what OT scholars believe about the view of origins
held by the Ancient Hebrew(s) who authored Genesis 1-11. And, as I
suggested above, this is a quite different question than the one at
hand; viz, what should be OUR view of origins and how should WE read the
Genesis account.

Warmest Regards,
Murray Hogg
Pastor, East Camberwell Baptist Church, Victoria, Australia
Post-Grad Student (MTh), Australian College of Theology

Randy Isaac wrote:
> I believe this quote from James Barr was discussed some time ago but
I can't seem to find it or remember what the conclusion was. Can some of
you please refresh my memory and give me the right perspective. A YEC'er
who is in dialog with me brought up that quote as follows:
>
> "As for what competent Hebrew scholars think about chronological
information in the Bible, here's a quote from James Barr, who at the
time was Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University:
>
> "... probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew
or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that
the writer(s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the
ideas that:
>
> "(a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the
same as the days of 24 we now experience,
>
> "(b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided
by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to
later stages in the biblical story,
>
> "(c) Noah's flood was understood to be worldwide and extinguish
all human and animal life except for those in the ark." **"
>
>
> Obviously, the argument he was raising against me was that all OT
scholars of repute are YEC.
>
> Randy

Randy Isaac wrote:
> I believe this quote from James Barr was discussed some time ago but I
> can't seem to find it or remember what the conclusion was. Can some of
> you please refresh my memory and give me the right perspective. A YEC'er
> who is in dialog with me brought up that quote as follows:
>
> "As for what competent Hebrew scholars think about chronological
> information in the Bible, here's a quote from James Barr, who at the
> time was Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University:
>
> "... probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or
> Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that
> the writer(s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the
> ideas that:
>
> "(a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the
> same as the days of 24 we now experience,
>
> "(b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by
> simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later
> stages in the biblical story,
>
> "(c) Noah's flood was understood to be worldwide and extinguish all
> human and animal life except for those in the ark." **"
>
>
> Obviously, the argument he was raising against me was that all OT
> scholars of repute are YEC.
>
> Randy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri May 16 19:02:48 2008