Response to: Let's End the Bible Versus Science Conflict

From: Matt Morton (
Date: Tue Feb 04 2003 - 11:46:45 EST

  • Next message: "Re: Response to: Let's End the Bible Versus Science Conflict"

    To Dick Fischer


    I am more than a little troubled by your letter (assuming I am understanding
    it correctly). But I come from the stand point that any subtle attempt to
    pervert the accuracy and integrity of the Bible is wrong. When mettle has
    met with mettle, the Bible has never been proven in error, been found
    faulty, etc, etc. These examples of biblical accuracy are readily evident in
    Medical Science, Biological Science, History, Physical Science, and
    Astronomy...and the list goes on. It seems every generation there is a group
    who believes that they have found the "new answer" and a better
    interpretation. I am not scared off by the possibility that my thought
    paradigm needs change. What does turn me off (as with your letter below) is
    when every one of your assumptions is built on assumption and speculation,
    so consequently a pretty shaky dirt pile is constructed, and then proclaimed
    as the rock of Gibraltar. I noticed you've attempted to ice over the biggest
    holes with a few scripture versus or obscure references. But I dare say that
    is takes some courage to circulate such incomplete evidence with the
    proclamations you and the referenced web-site have made. It seems as if you
    believe you've got it all figured out.

    I think the bible is pretty clear on whether we are divine creation or
    related to the phyletic tree of life with the apes. I am a little worried
    that you ask the question the way you did. You may want to consider revising
    it. I am hoping you are asking it that way for "shock value" to get people
    to click on the link immediately following that particular line of rhetoric.
    But, again, it appears as if you are completely serious in your conviction.

    The bible is not a scientific document and should not be viewed as such. We
    can not place a human contect on the miracoulous.

    With Kindest Regards

    Matt Morton

      ---Original Message-----
    From: Dick Fischer []
    Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 8:27 AM
    To: Genesis Proclaimed
    Subject: Let's End the Bible Versus Science Conflict

    Let's End the Bible Versus Science Conflict

    (A Bible, science, and history tidbit from Genesis Proclaimed Association)

    The Bible versus science conflict has tormented our education system since
    the Scopes "monkey" trial in the 1920's. Bewildered students for
    generations have been torn between religious organizations advocating sudden
    creation and educators who dutifully teach the scientific theory of
    biological evolution in public schools.

    Are Homo sapiens connected to the phyletic tree of life, sharing common
    ancestors with creatures more hairy, or is mankind disconnected - an object
    of special divine creation? Genesis Proclaimed Association ( <> ) announces a
    possible middle-ground solution.

    The heart of the creation-evolution debacle as it concerns our species
    derives from an inability to harmonize scientific explanations of life and
    man's origins with the description in Genesis. When the historical basis
    for Genesis becomes apparent, however, troubles melt away.

    GPA maintains that Genesis 1-11 was written for the Israelites (possibly by
    Moses) to describe the creation of the earth and life in terms they would
    understand, and to give them the genealogy and some of the history of their

    Commentators and casual readers of Genesis typically make an erroneous
    assumption. What was written as Semitic history is being read as human
    history. A small oversight perhaps, but with enormous negative impact.

    Paleo-anthropologists have traced the fossil evidence of hominids,
    terminating with modern humans, beyond four million years ago. The biblical
    origin of the Semites can be traced to Adam of Genesis who lived less that
    10,000 years ago judging from the neolithic description of Adam's

    The mention of farming, raising livestock, tents, implements of bronze and
    iron, and musical instruments in Genesis suggest that Adam was not
    contemporary with the Flintstones.

    In recent years we have found Accadian and Sumerian literature which
    corroborates and parallels much of the biblical narrative. Clay tablets
    recovered from the region of southern Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq) support
    a historical Adam, and have real value in solving what has been a perplexing
    puzzle of misunderstanding.

    Tantalizing clues point to such a man called "Adapa" who lived in a fishing
    village called Eridu at the edge of the Persian Gulf. Fragments of clay
    tablets have been found inscribed in four languages that describe this
    legendary sage "whose command no one could oppose." Adapa is further
    described as "blameless," "clean of hands," "anointer," and "observer of

    Adapa was a baker by trade, and Adam was told in the sweat of his face he
    would "eat bread" (Gen. 3:19). Adam was cut off from the "tree of life"
    (Gen. 3:24), whereby he could "live forever" (Gen. 3:22). Adapa was offered
    the food and water of eternal life which he declined. Both were "created."

    Was Adapa and Adam the same man? Adam was taken from the ground, in the
    Hebrew, 'adam from 'adamah. How close phonetically is 'adamah to Adapa?

    Did Adam's sin affect following generations? Consider these two lines from
    part of one Adapa fragment: "... what ill he has brought upon mankind, and
    the disease that he brought upon the bodies of men."

    Even pyramids in Egypt carved hundreds of years before Moses record a man
    created "out of the waters of chaos," called "Atum" who begot a number of
    sons including one named "Seth." And Seth was Adam's third son.

    Numerous biblical and historical clues suggest that Adam of Genesis was a
    historical personality who lived in southern Mesopotamia about 7,000 years
    ago - not at the apex of human life, but in the flow of human life.

    The origin of biological man can be found in biology textbooks, GPA
    contends. The first man to have a covenant relationship (Adam) was tasked
    with bringing a populated world into accountability. Being human, he

    Although "biblical literalism" has been singled out as the culprit causing
    many conservative Christians to reject modern scientific theories, the
    difficulty stems from a handful of translation errors and flawed
    interpretation. When mistakes are corrected, GPA insists, Bible and science
    difficulties disappear.

    References for historical data can be found in the published articles, "In
    Search of the Historical Adam, Parts 1 and 2." located on the American
    Scientific Affiliation web site.

    Contact: Dick Fischer
    Phone: 703-528-3163, alternate phone: 703-963-0426

    Organization: Genesis Proclaimed Association
                     P. O. Box 50111, Arlington, VA 22205
                     Tel. 703-963-0426
    Web Page: <>

    Please feel free to forward this message to a colleague.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Feb 04 2003 - 12:01:00 EST