Anything is possible.
Now obviously some things are logically impossible, but you can always get close enough so the difference does not matter. An example is Peleg.
Many years ago I had a web site about prophecy, called "WhyProphets.com" (the URL is now occupied by cybersquatting parasites, but that's another story). I explored the relationship between religion and science. Peleg was a good example. For those who don't know Peleg, here is Genesis 10:25, King James Version:
"And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan."
Eber was a great grandson of Noah. He lived (according to genesis) around 2200 BC. Some say "the earth was divided" just means a political dividing of the tribes. But others say it was a physical dividing of the continents after Noah.
Crazy? yes. But crazy is only a point of view. Let us see if this crazy can be made rational.
Let me be clear: I accept Lyell's geology and Darwin's evolution. The scientists are right. One hundred percent (or as close as makes no difference). I want to see if Genesis can also be right.
Why bother? Conflict versus cooperation
The world is full of conflicts. Creation science is supposed to oppose evolution. Atheists are supposed to oppose Christians. Capitalists are supposed to oppose socialists. Why? Why not accept both sides? Sure they disagree, but with a little thought the disagreements can become trivial. There is always another way to look at any problem.
Why avoid conflict? Because conflict is economically inefficient. It means people work against each other, cancelling out each others efforts. This wasted effort. It makes us weak. If we continue down that route some smarter groups will eventually arise and be economically more efficient (through cooperation). They will be strong, we will be weak, and suffer the consequences of our own weakness.
Avoiding conflict does not have to mean submission, It can mean using your brain to find a solution where both sides win. That is a much better way.
Peleg illustrates the principle that anything is possible. Here we take two completely opposite views (creation science and evolution) and show how they can both be correct. We can do the same with Adam and Noah and the rest, but let's start with Peleg.
What I am trying to prove
I want to make clear: I am not trying top prove that Peleg is "true." I am not trying to prove that this particular approach is "true." I am demonstrating that there is always another way to approach a problem: if this approach fails (which is might) then we could find another way, and another way. That is why anything is possible, or close enough that the difference is trivial That is why we do not need to fight. We can use our brains and cooperate instead. OK, enough preamble. On with Peleg.
When the world was one landmass
When we read of the continents dividing, we tend to think of when America and Africa fitted together. That is, Pangea, many millions of years ago. But there was another time, far more recent than that: the last ice age, ending around 9000 BC. Because of the ice, the oceans were lower. So it was possible to walk from Asia to America. There were still islands of course, but the two biggest landmasses were connected.
When was the Earth divided?
Imagine that you lived in Beringia (the area between Asia and America) before it divided. You would walk from one part to anther part. You would have friends scattered all over. Now what happened in 9000BC? The ice did not suddenly disappear all at once: it was a gradual process. One year a stream appeared. A few years later it was a river. A hundred years later it was a wide river. A few hundred years later it was a channel. But this whole process took thousands of years.
Each generation of Beringians was used to visiting their friends and family. Each one needed to very slightly improve its boats, but so what? Friends and family are still friends and family. The difference in distance was almost unnoticeable. The same process happened over a much longer period with birds and continental drift: bird migrate across oceans because when their ancestors started the oceans did not exist. There was never a sudden change, so each generation carried on as before. It is only in hindsight that we can now say "those continents are divided!" It did not feel that way at the time.
But there came a time eventually when the travel across Beringia stopped. Eventually the distance became so great that some other event caused the two sides to go their separate ways. At that point the historians would say they were divided. At that point the physical division became official. So when did it happen?
A short history of Beringia
For thousands of years after the ice age nothing much changed, The people who crossed back and forth were still there as they had always been. Then finally, around 4000 years BP (BP = Before the Present), around 2000 BC, archeologists find major changes:
"Beginning around 4000 BP, the archeological record becomes richer and more detailed, and a finer focus can be utilized and more specific chronologies and hypotheses proposed."This new culture began in the north west - the former land bridge - and spread away from it:
"One of the most distinctive and widespread Arctic cultural traditions appeared around 4000 BP. The Arctic Small Tool tradition (ASTt) [...spread] from the Bering Sea side of the Alaska Peninsula, northward along the coast and throughout the Brooks Range, and eventually, along the Canadian Arctic coast and the Arctic Archipelago to Greenland. [...] It appeared fully developed in northwestern Alaska and spread rapidly southward and eastward."How would historians at the time see this?
Imagine that you were a historian living in Beringia after 2000 BC. Your ancestors had lived there since time immemorial, for thousands of years. Oral history lasting thousands of years is not unknown - just ask the native Australians. Since time immemorial Beringia was one land. Sure, there were rivers that got wider and wider, but it was still Beringia. But finally, around 2000 BC, the tribal elders got together and faced the fact: the world had changed. The lands had divided, and it was time to accept the inevitable. They moved on.
After thousands of years this was a major, major event. This was bigger than the end of Rome, bigger than the end of Sumer, bigger than leaving Africa (because you could always just walk back again). This was the complete dividing of a world that had always, since before the origin of civilization, been one. This kind of story would be passed down from generation to generation, to the hunters who reached the east coat of the Americas, to the fishermen who traded from Greenland to Iceland to Britain to the Mediterranean. And a thousand years later (some time before the captivity of 600BC) it merited a line on the Hebrew book of origins. They naturally linked it to Noah and the Great Flood (a topic for another day).
The Book of Genesis
The Book of Origins (Genesis means origins) says that Noah had a son called Shem or Sem: the father of the Sem-itic peoples. Sem had a great grandson called Eber or Heber: the father of the Hebrews. His son was called Peleg, he lived around 2200 BC, the time "when the Earth was divided."
Conclusion
Once again let me stress that I am not saying this is right. It may be proven wrong, so we would need a different approach. This blog is not about the Bible in particular, it is about stories and their relationship to truth.
I am just demonstrating that there is always another way to view any disagreement. Bible literalists and scientists do not need to argue. Both sides can be right. Atheist geologists can be one hundred percent right and yet still accept Genesis as an eye witness account if they want to. Anything is possible.
0 comments:
Post a Comment