Again, these reviews of Barr make use of his four essays:
- UBC – Ussher and Biblical Chronology, 1985
- BCLS – Biblical Chronology: Legend Or Science?, 1987
- LBC – Luther and Biblical Chronology, 1990
- PSC – Pre-scientific Chronology, 1999
It was actually the assumption that all scripture hung together that forced Ussher at certain points to nullify the extremely probable sense of the text.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Franz Pieper also speaks much about what is "reasonable" and "sensible" for a Christian reader of his Bible. Drawing on Walther's work, he said (Christian Dogmatics, vol. 1, page 310):
... as a natural, rational observation of the creation reveals God as its Creator (Rom. 1:18 ff.), so, too, a natural, rational study of Holy Scripture points to God as its author.By this we see that Prof. James Barr, and all modern theologians and scholars, are actually unnatural in their observations and study... they are unnatural and irrational in their criticism of Holy Scriptures.
In the next Part 6i, I will cover Barr's comments against Luther's use of Daniel's prophecy of the Seventy Weeks.