Abstract

Concordism functioned as the consensus view in Protestant circles until the rise of Darwinism. Darwinism upended evangelical beliefs about the relationship between the Bible and science, and concordism began to fall out of favor. Subsequently, theologians began formulating statements which collated doctrines and definitions in attempts to delineate boundaries for orthodox belief. Yet while definitions and doctrines are necessary for belief, they are not sufficient for fruitful discussion and discovery of how the early chapters of Genesis could accurately depict the Earth’s early history. With this realization, scholars began developing “hybrid models” which proposed intertwined theological-scientific theories in hopes of explaining both the known scientific evidence as well as the import of Scripture. Thus, even as concordism was disdained by theologically liberal academics, hybrid models multiplied, responded to new evidence, and achieved varying levels of adoption. Analysis of older hybrid models (as well as the recent hybrid model proposed by William Lane Craig) results in insights applicable to models more broadly as well as concordism in particular.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call