Wow, this is a very demanding (or mean) forum. I try to correct myself, and the correction is not accepted, and I am painted as some kind of a horrible actor–“either intentionally dishonest or a gross misuse of vocabulary.”
So let’s start over. Walton spends 32.54% of his book, based on the text portion of the book itself, discussing in his words “metaphysical and philosophical questions” (as I clarified before.) Can we try to discuss so that we understand each others positions rather than to paint the other person as a bad actor? I am fully cognizant that it is unlikely that everyone on any thread will ever agree, but can we at least be respectful?
And by now we have lost the point of the illustration itself which is:
In this forum, there is a very strong emphasis by some BL folks that we must rely on scholars. But that is not applied evenhandedly. When Walton strays out of his lane (text analyst) into philosophy, no one calls him on that.
While I am dissing Walton, let me commit one more offense. He says, “This is the layer in which science has chosen to operate and where it is most useful.” (page 15 in The Lost World of Genesis One)
The context is hardly important at all. Science doesn’t “choose” anything. Scientists do. Nowadays when politicians and celebrities and others that pretend to speak with authority invoke the mantra of “science says” or “we follow the science.” Again, science is silent. Scientists speak, and when they speak nonsense, it is still nonsense.