RE: Kline article in PSCF (D. Kidner on Adam)

Allan Harvey (
Fri, 5 Apr 1996 17:09:57 -0700

Glenn Morton writes:

>Davis Young writes:
>"2. The failure of literalism and concordism suggests tht the Bible
>may not be expected to provide precise 'information' or 'data'
>about the physical structure and history of the planet or cosmos."
>Davis A. Young, Scripture in the Hands of Geologists, Part Two,"
>Westminster Theological Journal, 49, 1987,p. 294
>This does not sound to me like the Bible is meant to be taken as part of the
>single reality I live in. Early Genesis, according to Young, does not
>describe the history of this cosmos in which I find myself. So of what value
>is the early part of Genesis?

Without putting myself in Davis Young's mind, I don't think Glenn's
interpretation of the quoted paragraph is quite fair. Young is not saying
early Genesis does not describe the history of the cosmos. He is just
saying that it does not describe it with scientific detail and precision.
Which is a far cry from saying that it is unreliable as a source of truth or
contrary to science. As others have said, there is one truth, but different
(not contradictory, but complimentary) angles of looking at that truth. If
a child asks me how he came to be, I could answer "God made you." and quote
the part of Psalm 139 about God knitting us in our mother's womb. Or I
could talk about egg and sperm and DNA and embryonic biology. Both angles
have their place, and neither one is false. Sometimes I feel like those who
try so hard to make Genesis adopt the scientific angle would look at the
"knitting" metaphor in Psalm 139 and try to find what aspect of embryology
corresponded to a cross-stitch.

A blessed Easter to everyone ...

| Dr. Allan H. Harvey | |
| Physical and Chemical Properties Division | Phone: (303)497-3555 |
| National Institute of Standards & Technology | Fax: (303)497-5224 |
| 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80303 | |
| "Don't blame the government for what I say, or vice versa." |