Hi Paul, You wrote:
>I think there is a perfectly reasonable and biblical alternative:
>
>God has delegated the discovery of natural truth to mankind (Gen
>1:26-28) and consequently does not reveal those kinds of truths.
>I see no claims anywhere in Scripture to the effect that God
>intends to reveal truths of the natural world. I see throughout
>the Bible, including in the life and teaching of Jesus,
>accommodation to the science of the times.
I know your view quite well having read your excellently argued book.
However, one question I don't recall you ever being able to answer, at least
to my satisfaction, is this: If God delegated the discovery of natural truth
to man, how can you be sure He didn't also delegate the discovery of
theological truth to man? Upon what basis, theological, scriptural or
natural, do you reject the delegation of theological discovery? And if God
did delegate only scientific discovery, where does God tell us this? You
never tell your readers exactly what the basis for your belief that God
delegated the search for natural truth is. Is it a theological revelation?
Where is it in the Scripture? Did God tell you that He delegated this task?
I simply don't see that you have much here other than an assumption, made by
you in order to avoid the nasty science problems. How do you KNOW your
assumption of God's delegation is actually TRUE?
The consequences of God delegating the discovery of theological truth to
mankind are such that the entire Hebrew Scriptures might simply be a dead
end in mankind's search.
>
>It is not logical to say that if God accommodated his revelation
>of spiritual truths to ancient science, then he is making the
>science up from the whole cloth of falsity. He is not making
>anything up.
OK, so man makes it up and calls it an inspired word of God. What
epistemological basis do we have for saying that all descriptions of the
natural world in the Bible are not true and only the theological extracts
are true? Where does it say this in any theological document--other than
your book and preferably within Scripture? And indeed, if descriptions of
the natural world are delegated, how do you separate the description of the
resurrected body from that delegation? When does this delegation end
temporally? If people can be wrong about descriptions of the creation of the
world, floating axe-heads and other obviously false things, were the
apostles still allowed freedom in their description and discovery of the
natural world when they mistakenly thought they saw Jesus walk through a
wall into a locked room?
The problem I have with your view Paul, is that you make an assumption which
may be correct, may be wrong. But that assumption is so key to your
position, that it would really be nicer if one could find it stated in
Scripture rather than only in your books.
glenn
see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
for lots of creation/evolution information
anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
personal stories of struggle
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 03 2002 - 14:43:23 EDT