I should like to quote the following: "Getting into a boat, Jesus crossed
over the sea and came to His own city.
And they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed. Seeing their faith,
Jesus said to the paralytic, «Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven.»
And some of the scribes said to themselves, «This fellow blasphemes.» And
Jesus knowing their thoughts said, «Why are you thinking evil in your
hearts? «Which is easier, to say, "Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, "Get
up, and walk'? «But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority
on earth to forgive sins» -- then He said to the paralytic, «Get up, pick up
your bed and go home.»
And he got up and went home." Matt. 9:1-7.
The scribes knew that only God could forgive sins, did Christ, therefore,
compromise His nature by saying to get up and walk? Certainly not! His
purpose was to show His authority by performing a miraculous cure.
I see the attitude of Philip Johnson somewhat the same. If I can defeat the
argument of the philosophical evolutionist without bringing Scripture into
the picture, then why not do so? Remember in some crowds once you bring in
Scripture you are branded in order to weaken your case, why give the enemy
ammunition when you do not have to do so?
Take care,
Moorad
-----Original Message-----
From: Wendee Holtcamp <wendee@greendzn.com>
To: asa@calvin.edu <asa@calvin.edu>
Date: Sunday, December 05, 1999 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: Phil Johnson's agenda
>
>----------
>>From: glenn morton <mortongr@flash.net>wrote:
>
>>I couldn't sleep because of this note written by Johnson. So, I came
>>upstairs to write this. And this is a sad thing. Many may disagree with me
>>on this but from my perspective Johnson's rather arrogant in-your-face
>>message that Christianity is not on the top of his agenda bothers me. On
>
>
>This is exactly how he came across on Dobson's show. Although I do not like
>to judge someone based one one "meeting," I believe Christians that love
God
>with all their heart, mind, soul, and strength (or strive to at the very
>least) exude a "fragrance" of the Spirit - or the fruit of the Spirit
>mentioned in Galatians 5:22 (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness,
goodness,
>faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control). These things are evident
>through a person's lifestyle, speech, actions, writings. Whereas the acts
of
>the sinful nature are: "...hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish
>ambition, dissensions, factions and envy..." (Part of Gal 5:20). When I
feel
>the fruits of the Spirit coming from a person in "authority" (whether
>author, minister, teacher, or friend), that is who I choose to listen to. I
>don't care how intelligent or how many college or seminary degrees someone
>has, if I don't feel the Spirit, I do not consider them someone I should be
>influenced by.
>
>>the 18th of November I e-mailed Paul Nelson to cite some things that
>>saddened me about the ID movement the main thing. One of them was
Johnson's
>>statement in Touchstone last summer. I am saddened that they want to
remove
>>the Bible from the public discussion. And what is so surprising to me is
>
>I absolutely think the Bible should be used in every way possible when
>discussing all sorts of issues, including creation-evolution, or when
>talking to non-believers. I believe that the Bible is absolutely the
>inspired Word of God, that has power far above and beyond anything I could
>say. Of course, believers can help illumine some passages to those who
don't
>understand (because the Bible does say to those who are "perishing" the
>gospel is "folly" - they often don't have the spiritual capacity to
>understand until they accept Jesus as Lord and Savior).
>
>I have found that when discussing certain "arguments" about the Christian
>faith, people may react harshly if I state something as opinion, but if I
>quote Scripture, even if they don't believe, they have sort of an innate
>tendency not to harshly attack it. I believe that is because in the core of
>most people's beings, they connect through the Word of God when they hear
>it, even if they don't (yet) accept it.
>
>Johnson's wanting to take the Bible out of his arguments for intelligent
>design, in my opinion, is absolutely counterproductive to spreading the
>gospel. Johnson claims to not be in a faith-based organization. If not,
>isn't his (and Well's) desire to destroy Darwinism then akin to "selfish
>ambition"? Matthew 12: 30 "He who is not with me is against me, and he who
>does not gather, scatters."
>
>And also very relevant to all this, "But I tell you that men will have to
>give account on the day of judgement fore every careless word spoken. For
by
>your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned."
>Matthew 12:36-37.
>
>(All quotes from NIV Bible)
>
>Wendee