[net.origins] when proven wrong, retreat into metaphors

eklhad@ihnet.UUCP (K. A. Dahlke) (02/24/85)

<  recant, recant,  you heretic!! >

One of the best reasons for questioning creationism is the Bible's dubious
track record.  I shall consider only one example, but there are others.
Is the earth round or flat?  During the last 3,000 years, many
individuals discovered the correct answer, and a few advertised
their new found knowledge.  They were ruthlessly silenced by the local
religious authorities.  When reasons were given, they often included
"the Bible says the earth is flat", and maybe it does.
Passages containing "the ends of the earth ... the four corners
of the earth ... the four winds of the earth ..." are scattered throughout
the scriptures.  Many of these are in Revelations.
Within the last couple centuries, even stubborn dogmatic theologians have
accepted the spherical nature of our world, so what happened to the Bible?
An impressive trick.  Suddenly all these verses are considered metaphors,
poetic you might say.  To help their cause, they even found
(after diligent searches) a verse in Ecclesiasties which says
"he sits upon the circle of the earth".  When I was young, my sunday school
teacher presented this very verse, declaring it "substantial evidence 
for the Bible's validity.  After all, Gawd knew the shape of our
planet long before any scientist had figured it out ... ".
At the time, I bought the argument (sadly).

This retreat into re-interpretation, although disturbing,
is in some ways encouraging.  Although religious dogma will
probably remain forever, perhaps creationism will fade into metaphorism.
Perhaps 200 years from now, sunday school teachers will explain:
"the day in Genesis chapter 1 is a metaphor, and the time period
represented could have been millions or billions of years.
But don't dwell on that, read the story itself, and notice that the
various entities appeared in the correct order.  First the planet,
then life in the oceans, then animals on land, then humans.
You see, the Bible is Gawd's word, and completely correct.
After all, Gawd knew all about evolution long before
any scientist had figured it out ... ".
This scenario is frightening, since the Bible thumpers will remain strong,
but at least their students will be allowed to learn evolutionary biology.
-- 
	Having, is not so pleasing a thing after all, as wanting.
	It is not logical, but it is often true.
Karl Dahlke    ihnp4!ihnet!eklhad