Glenn wrote:

From: John Burgeson (burgy@compuserve.com)
Date: Mon Mar 13 2000 - 13:56:26 EST

  • Next message: PHSEELY@aol.com: "Re: Chimps, sin, Adam and Christ"

    Glenn wrote, in a dialog with George Murphy:

    " But then if God can't communicate to
    us any real truth and He knows no history then why bother with Him.? That
    is where your theology leads me. To me I would feel self-deceived. I was
    deceived and self-deceived once as a YEC. I simply won't go there again. I
    want the real truth and nothing but the real truth. Not some sham where I
    must believe that that which is not true really is true."

    The answer to your first (hypothetical) question is, of course, I would
    not.
    I think George would agree with this position, as would everyone
    else on this LISTSERV.

    But George's theology, which is very well thought out IMHO, even though I
    don't agree with it entirely, does not lead him, or me if I accepted it, to
    your statement #1. I understand that it apparently does lead you there. I
    see
    it as incomplete reasoning, something all of us do at times!

    We all desire "the truth and nothing but the real (sic) truth. It is quite
    clear
    to me that this desire is completed only iin Jesus Christ, not in any set
    of human reasoning,
    about origins, baptism, original sin, biblical inerrancy, predestination,
    communion, existence of evil, or any other issue we debate here, and
    elsewhere,
    so eloquently (or not, in some cases).

    George and I, with most others here, are content to live with a higher
    degree of
    uncertainty than you are. YECs and fundementalists, of which I count many
    as friends,
    need to posit even less uncertainty than you.

    At least that's my 2c worth.

    Burgy



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 13 2000 - 13:58:08 EST