I don’t think this is the same comparison, For one, it wasn’t “European discovery”… there was already millions of people before Columbus landed here. Hundreds of different Native American tribes, not even including Incans, Aztecs, Mayans etc., This is not the same as 8 people rebuilding all of society from scratch… and not only “all of society” but a multitude of different societies with different beliefs, different religions etc.
And I’m not proposing that people should be castigated. But it still boils down to whether or not the reasons for going against the consensus (I’ve been spelling the word wrong apparently… sorry about that), are compelling, Like Eddie has elaborated on, you have not demonstrated good reasons for thinking otherwise. You’re merely saying “It’s possible” … well, of course, most everything is “possible” … but that doesn’t mean convincing.
In the case where the pyramids are concerned, Eddie has stated that most people come to the conclusion that they were built before the date of the flood. So this is an even bigger problem than that of Babel.
Excellent points, here Eddie. Finding a consensus (yay for correct word usage :D!) on Church Father’s opinions on certain issues can be a daunting task. Origen’s views on the Garden Story, Cain “leaving the presence of the Lord”, and even Satan leading Jesus up a tall mountain, demonstrates that people simply don’t “allegorize” things for the pure sake of conforming with modern scientific research — Origen lived in the 2nd century AD. What “modern science” was he trying to accommodate?
I think this issue is key. Heavenly things are more important than earthly things … and if you can’t convince people of the earthly things, how can one convince others of more important issues… like salvation and the Gospel?
You are right in one sense; they didn’t rebuild from scratch as they brought along knowledge and tools from the old world. But on the other hand. they did not build on the high society of the aboriginals; they mostly tore it down or ignored it, and started from scratch on the new continent. However, they brought along their tools and knowledge, which is what the people on the ark would have done as well.
Well, what is convincing to one is not convincing to another. Nor am I expert in the archeological interpretations in terms of the common perceptions within that field. While I think a lot of good knowledge has been attained, it is still also true that errors are made. Often it was postulated that various biblical stories didn’t happen, until archeological evidence was finally uncovered that demonstrated they did happen. I don’t claim this is the case with the flood, but … In addition, I know of these two cases, one where C14 found a timeline to be 400yrs too long, and another where egyptian kings were discovered to have lived and ruled simultaneously, thus reducing that lineage’s timeline. Beyond that is beyond me.
I realize that it is postulated that the pyramids were built before the flood. I can’t provide the detail for the uncertainty in the Egyptian chronology, which is found here Egypt Chronology But in general, there is uncertainty and guesswork due to the various different chronologies. Some are regarded as more complete or authoritative than others…
So you prefer to accept a scientific consensus, rather than a religious consensus. Whatever. You are entitled to object to it if you want.
I have no problem with this, but I believe it is done in a spirit of civility combined with challenge and presentation of actual evidence. Keeping in mind also that absorption of new information, as well as understanding objections to its interpretation is a time-consuming process. Often truth is not quite so self-evident as it is presented to be. Otherwise everyone would believe in Jesus, who claimed to be the way, the truth, and the life. But many don’t.
Ceasar also claimed to be god, as did many Egyptian rulers. This was their truth, and it was presented as self-evident. Like gods, they had the power of life and death. But they died too.
Jesus said it would be sad to gain the whole world and lose your soul, which is another truth that many people’s minds have been constrained not to accept.
The first pyramids were built in Saqqara, 15 miles south of Giza between 2650 to 2620 BC by Pharoah Netjerikhet. This is well established by archaeology. Their remains are still there.
Tim,
Nobody ever talks about the Indus civilization that flourished for half a millennium from about 2600 bc to 1900 bc. Isn’t it worthy of comparison with those of ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, as the beginning of Indian civilization and possibly as the origin of Hinduism?
John, I’m not understanding the distinction you are making here. By “scientific consensus” are you meaning the secularist and atheist community? And by “religious consensus” are you meaning the Christian community? I don’t think Eddie could have made it more clear that the academic consensus he was referring too included people of all stripes: atheist, Buddhist, Muslim (even Christian). In other words, non-partisan and largely unbiased. To me this is a good thing.
I feel by your quote you are doing a disservice by implying that the “religious consensus” is separate from that of the scientific. Clearly Christians are capable of doing science, and the scientific community includes people of all stripes. We can work together to come to some sort of harmony, but you seem more inclined to divide the issue into two groups, when clearly it’s a mix of people.
Certainly you are right that the idea of consensus divides people into groups, those who agree with consensus and those who do not. I do not find the use of “consensus” as an argument very useful nor compelling, so it would be good to drop the circularity as you imply.
If the flood wasn’t global how do you explain this from Genesis:
Genesis 7:23-24-So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who were with him in the ark remained alive.And the waters prevailed on the earth one hundred and fifty days.
You write: “If the flood wasn’t global how do you explain this from Genesis:
Genesis 7:23-24-So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground…”
I don’t see how you can seriously discuss the issues of Biblical historicity … when you use a description of a global flood as a PROOF that a global flood happened.
I think you might be misunderstanding what James was meaning. While I can’t speak for him, it came off to me like he was asking “is the flood story described as local or global?” Not necessarily, “Did the flood historically happen?”
Not sure why you reference Jesus’ statement about being a vine. That’s an obvious metaphor to 99.9% of the Christian community (only the most flaming literalist will tell you otherwise).
Good point. Not sure if anyone considered Origen a scientist when he wrote in his book, On First Principles, that Adam and Eve must be taken allegorically.
I think I have to specify the “Christian Scientific” community - - which is the focus of BioLogos.
It wouldn’t be particularly relevant if NON-Christians Scientists interpreted Eden as figurative.
But in the realm of Christianity, I think there is overwhelming agreement that Scientists who are practicing
Christians have no problem relegating the Eden story cycle into the category of “figurative, not historical”.
I think what Eddie meant was that you don’t have to be scientifically inclined to come to the conclusions that Adam and Eve, are some form of metaphor, allegory etc.,
I’m not a scientist, and I largely came on to this site to get othe people’s viewpoints on these issues. It wasn’t even science that led me from my prior YEC convictions… It was simply getting increasingly difficult to continue reading the Bible with literalistic interpretation.