Re: How to interpret Adam (was: Re: Kerkut)

From: Dick Fischer <>
Date: Sat Feb 14 2004 - 20:38:56 EST

George Murphy wrote:

> We're obviously not in agreement but I fail to see how I can be
> accused of making historical errors in this discussion. After all, I'm
> arguing, inter alia, that it's a mistake to insist that early Genesis
> must be read as historical narrative. You may think I'm theologically
> out to lunch, but how historically?

I didn't set out to prove anything. I was published in the Washington Post
in 1986, The Post editor was so happy with what I wrote they put it on the
LA Times - Washington Post Newswire and made it available to over 500
newspapers worldwide. And this was after I had read Genesis 2-11 a few
times and four books on anthropology. I blush now just thinking about it.

Five years later, after investing a lot of time reading and researching
toward producing a book, I became convinced that my method of apology that
looked so promising at the time was unworkable. Simply put, it didn't fit
the facts. Bummer.

After a year and a half of feeling sorry for myself, a friend showed me a
book on archaeology. That rekindled me, and after consuming over 800 books
on related subjects and countless magazine articles, and completing a
masters degree in theology, I have a workable method of apology that thus
far holds up on all counts, theologically (taking Genesis literally),
historically (all the pieces fit), and scientifically.

What I advocate now, that Genesis 2-11 does appear to have historically
integrity, can be substantiated. There is no other method of apology that
will come close, because something has to be left out. Liberal theology,
starting in 1860 with Barth, Bultmann, and so on, leaves out history. YEC
methodology ignores science. If Bible, science, and history are all given
full face value (I'm not saying equal value) then this is the method that

So you are saying you won't change. Fine. YECs don't change, atheists
don't change, and liberal theologians don't change. All I am saying is
that with this method of apology one can put hundreds if not thousands of
biblical, historical and scientific data points on a chart (hypothetically
not literally) and draw a straight line through them that leaves virtually
nothing out. YEC's can't, and you can't.

Now, educating the whole world ain't easy, but eventually enough will come
to recognize that there is value in having a theological position that fits
the real world to start a small movement in that direction. But it won't
likely happen in my lifetime.

Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
Received on Sat Feb 14 20:43:53 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Feb 14 2004 - 20:43:54 EST