--- Jim Eisele <jeisele@starpower.net> wrote:
> A) Could help save people's faith
Can just as easily undermine it if the Truth of
Christianity is made conditional upon Concordism,
which it should not be, especially in regards to the
Old Testament.
> B) Is a positive intellectual exercise
Which can smack of ad hoc and ad posteriori reasoning.
One that is generally speculative. Writing fiction
can be a positive intellectual exercise as well.
> C) Weren't the Bereans praised in the NT?
When compared to the Thessalonians, yes. Not that I
endorse it, but here is one view about what the
noble-mindedness of the Bereans meant:
http://www.catholic-convert.com/writings/sola.html
However, even assuming it truly is commending a review
od scripture, you are mixing apples and oranges in
terms of topic. They were not concerned with a
scientific interpretation of scripture, they were
concerned with whether scripture supported Paul's
proclamation of Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah.
This is an appropriate use of relevant scripture,
because many of the OT texts talk about the Messiah
who is to come. So, I find this reference, even if
accurately described, inapposite to the question of
whether any part of the Bible is a scientific text or
intended to be. It does support an understanding of
Jesus as the Christ prophesied in the OT. I support
that wholeheartedly.
> D) It is dangerous to discount the Bible
It is dangerous to use books of the Bible for purposes
that were not intended by their authors.
> Of course, concordism often gets criticized.
> I'm not sure why. Could someone enlighten me?
>
> Jim
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
http://health.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 28 2002 - 19:47:51 EDT