RE: Virgin Birth

From: Adrian Teo (ateo@whitworth.edu)
Date: Mon Mar 04 2002 - 01:59:51 EST

  • Next message: Stuart d Kirkley: "RE: Virgin Birth"

    Hello Guy,

    While I disagree strongly with Stuart's conclusions, I must say I am not
    surprised. There are many intellectual Christians who believe, as Howard
    does and has argued, that all matters of faith should be open to question
    and reevaluation. Stuart is simply putting this belief into practice and
    has, IMHO, presented a somewhat reasonable and plausible argument for
    rejecting the divinity of Christ. This Arian argument is still very much
    around today, and they are holding their ground quite well. The Scriptures
    can be used to support both opposing arguments. We will continue to hear
    these arguments brought up, continue to see denominations splitting up over
    doctrinal disagreements, and continue to see fragmentation in the church as
    long as people continue to boldly adopt this skeptical/critical approach to
    Christianity. It is every man and woman for himself/herself. We each become
    our final arbiter of truth.

    This is my observation of the state of affairs, and I've tried to describe
    it as objectively as possible, given my limitations. It is not in any way
    intended to offend or insult anyone, nor to accuse anyone of being
    unChristian (unOrthodox perhaps), although we do need to define the
    bounadries of Christianity, lest it becomes a menaingless concept.

    My two-cents worth.

    Adrian.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Guy Blanchet
    To: stucandu@lycos.com
    Cc: asa@calvin.edu
    Sent: 3/2/2002 6:56 PM
    Subject: Re: Virgin Birth

    Stuart d Kirkley a écrit:

    > --
    >
    > On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:24:28
    > bivalve wrote:
    > Even being born as the heir apparent to Caesar
    > would have made the Creator physically dependent on others to feed
    > and clean Him.
    >
    > I still, for the life of me, can not understand how people can
    rationally state that Jesus was God incarnate. To me this is one of the
    biggest stumbling blocks of theololgy which stems from and leads to a
    narrowness of scriptural interpretation. If, as the Bible states clearly
    many times, God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son
    to be the Saviour of the world, reveals God as Parent and Son as
    offspring, distinct and individual, how do you arrive at the idea that
    Jesus was God???!! I just find it incredulous that well reasoned people
    can actually hold to this doctrine.
    > Sorry, I had to get that out.
    >
    > 2,000,000,000 Web Pages--you only need 1. Save time with My Lycos.
    > http://my.lycos.com

    Mr Kirkley,

    Do you feel better now that you 'got it out'? So you're blown away by
    the fact that well-reasoned people believe Jesus is God? Don't be.
    Isaiah said these words about Jesus : "See, I lay in Zion a stone that
    causes men to stumble, and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who
    trusts in him will never be put to shame." The stone is Jesus and he
    causes certain people to stumble. I also attract your attention to
    these words from Paul in first Corinthians: "Has God not made foolish
    the wisdom of the world.[...] For the foolishness of God is wiser than
    man's wisdom, [...]." Mr. Kirkly,
    be careful of worldly wisdom lest you stumble yourself.

    GB



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 04 2002 - 02:02:15 EST