Re: Vernon's claim (2)

From: Vernon Jenkins (vernon.jenkins@virgin.net)
Date: Tue Sep 25 2001 - 19:32:39 EDT

  • Next message: Pharmadictionary@aol.com: "Medical Pharma Biotech Abbreviations"

    Gordon,

    Thank you for your tacit acceptance of my thesis. Perhaps we can now
    begin discussing some of the many significant implications of the OBC
    phenomena.

    To answer your comment on my recent closing remarks:

    (1) God's revelation to man has surely taken the form of a progression -
    as we find it briefly summarised in Hebrews 1:1,2.

    (2) I cannot agree that Rev.22:18,19 refers to the whole Bible. Reading
    the warnings carefully we observe the phrase "the plagues that are
    written in this book" appears to be only relevant to the Book of
    Revelation.

    (3) The Canon did not become a fixed entity until the 4th century.

    So, beginning with the pure (and short!) revelation of Eden - and the
    severing of man's relationship with his Maker - we have the process of
    rapprochement described in the pages of Scripture. The ultimate stage -
    the Incarnation and what followed - was preceded by a series of steps
    which, at times, involved God's dealing directly with certain
    individuals, and at others, his performing open miracles and instituting
    general forms of worship. Throughout all this, the Lord has ever
    graciously provided all that man has required to re-establish a close
    personal relationship with him.

    Vernon

    http://www.otherbiblecode.com
        

    gordon brown wrote:
    >
    > On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Vernon Jenkins wrote:
    >
    > > Concerning your closing comments: who are we to question what God
    > > deems sufficient and appropriate revelation for any particular age?
    >
    > Vernon,
    >
    > I am not sure how to interpret the foregoing remarks. Do you believe
    > that the Scripture was not completed in the first century and that
    > additions made since that time and appearing in the King James Version
    > are to be regarded as inspired along with the first century writings?
    > If so, I disagree with you and note that you are going against the
    > interpretation of Rev. 22:18-19 that applies it to all the Scripture
    > written up to that time.
    >
    > Gordon Brown
    > Department of Mathematics
    > University of Colorado
    > Boulder, CO 80309-0395

    Vernon had written:

    I think it important that we see these remarkable coincidences (which
    you believe 'somehow stand out from most of the rest of Scripture.') -
    as a facet of the wider OBC phenomena. In a recent email to Moorad I
    sketched a scenario - or 'Theory of Divine Intent' (TDI)* - that alone
    appears to provide a reasonable explanation of the totality of the
    empirical data. As a mathematician you will already be aware of the
    strength of my case - though you have yet to admit as much.

    I therefore suggest that a rebuttal of my claim re the English KJV
    cannot succeed until a reasonable naturalistic explanation be found for
    the whole body of OBC phenomena.

    Concerning your closing comments: who are we to question what God deems
    sufficient and appropriate revelation for any particular age?

    Vernon

    http://www.otherbiblecode.com

    * "That the Creator, in his wisdom, has underwritten his word with
    specific evidences of his being and sovereignty - these to be revealed
    at the appointed time (ie, now)."



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Sep 25 2001 - 19:32:47 EDT