Page 226 - Flipping book The Adam Paradox Hypothesis - Second Edition.pdf

The Ādam Paradox Hypothesis 203
2. Beacon Reading vs. Concordism
The distinction is vital. Concordism treats revelation as a disguised textbook,
where every discovery must be “found” in a verse. This trivializes both science
and scripture.
Beacon reading is different. It does not pretend that the Qur
ʾān predicts
FOXP2 or names Blombos Cave. Rather, it proposes that revelation highlights
the thresholds that science itself struggles to explain:
Why did anatomically modern humans remain symbolically mute for so
long?
Why did symbols, myths, and contracts appear suddenly, and everywhere,
around 70,000 years ago?
Why does survival scale only when trust and law appear?
The Qur
ʾān calls these thresholds clay, names, spirit, and trust. Science, working
independently, has discovered the same thresholds in fossils, artifacts, and
genes.
3. Beacons as Scientific Orientation
Darwin’s metaphor of “selection” became a program: collect fossils, trace
variation, map fitness. Einstein’s “curvature” became a program: calculate
geodesics, measure starlight bending.
The Qur
ʾānic beacons can serve in the same way. They are not replacements for
data, but orientations that turn scattered data into pattern. Without them,
fossils and genes look like fragments; with them, they form a coherent narrative
of readiness, ignition, and responsibility.