Saturday, May 6, 2006
Scientists and Literalists
Daniel Born in The Common Review
Too many to name or quote or link to any in particular, so we'll have to take it on faith.
There might have been a rough spot or two along the historical way resulting from generalizations about people based on very limited contact. ¶ 5/06/2006 11:03:00 AM
But it is instructive to note that the appearance of two creation accounts in Genesis is anathema to fundamentalist readers, who above all else want to keep the scriptures simple, straightforward, and in need of almost no interpretation whatsoever. Scores of Web sites attempt to explain, with elaborate verbal contortions, how the two different accounts are really a single account.
Too many to name or quote or link to any in particular, so we'll have to take it on faith.
For anyone who seeks to understand the workings of the fundamentalist mind, this is the best starting point I know, and if one wonders why the interpretation of an ancient Hebrew text should matter so much, all I can say is that reading badly--in other words, incompetent interpretation--can be blamed for a considerable sum of human cruelty and misery.
There might have been a rough spot or two along the historical way resulting from generalizations about people based on very limited contact. ¶ 5/06/2006 11:03:00 AM
