I en föreläsning om Bibeln och vetenskap säger J.P. Moreland ett par intressanta saker angående ung-jord-kreationism och skapelseberättelsen. Hela föreläsningen är förvisso intressant, men just det här är så pass intressant att jag tog mig tid att transkribera. (Formateringen är således min.)
If 80 % of the Hebrew scholars at evangelical seminaries in America and Canada held the same view, and say 10 or 15 % held another view, [even] that would be a problem for me. But given the state of Hebrew scholarship, among our men and women who love the Scriptures, and given that they’re in various places, for anyone to claim that they have a view of the early chapters of Genesis that they’re sure is right… You can have a view, that’s one thing, and say ”This is what I think it teaches”… But for you to look me straight in the eye and say ”This is what it teaches” is extraordinary risky.
So what I’m suggesting is that I don’t really know what to make of those early chapters of Genesis in terms of the timing on it and in terms of what is largely driving the narrative. Is it largely chronology? How much of it is topical? I don’t know.
It is permissible for you to be a Young Earth creationist that believes that the days of Genesis are 24-hour periods in six consecutive days and that the universe is fairly young. That’s permissible. Why? Because there are good people in our community who know their stuff that hold that view.
What is not permissible is for you to hold this as a test for fidelity to Scripture or as a way of inspecting other peoples commitment to Jesus Christ. That is completely out of bounds!
And you aren’t smart enough to make that case, and neither is Ken Ham or anybody else. So what I’m saying to you is that it is one thing to hold a view, it’s another to hold it as the orthodox position – that is completely out of bounds!
Now, I’m not a theistic evolutionist, nor the son of one, and I don’t believe that the early chapters of Genesis are consistent with evolution. [...] What if they discovered that Adam and Eve were 100 000 years old? Would that bother me? No. Why? Because a lot of Old Testament scholars believe that the genealogies only touch highlights and an awful lot of generations aren’t included in those genealogies.
We have people that are experts on this question and they do not agree and have different views, and they hold their views fairly lightly, because they realize that the text is consistent with a lot of different interpretations here.
That means, as a believer, who is not an Old Testament expert, I may have a view on it, but I am certainly not gonna hold that as a test for everybody else.
Lyssna gärna på hela föreläsningen! Moreland säger en hel del bra saker.