From: Dr. Blake Nelson (bnelson301@yahoo.com)
Date: Thu Nov 06 2003 - 17:57:07 EST
--- Vernon Jenkins <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net> wrote:
(SNIP)
> But there is no coercion here! You might still
> choose to believe it all to
> be a miracle of chance. However, for the Christian
> realist _fact_ must
> surely supercede _faith_ and one's love for the Lord
> is more than likely
> enhanced.
But to go back to Walt's point 1) if you do not need
the proof you offer as proof, then it is certainly not
necessary to faith, 2) those who do not have faith are
unlikely to see it as proof.
Honestly, has your insight converted anyone to belief
in Jesus of Nazareth?
(SNIP)
>
> Without the Judaeo-Christian Scriptures we would
> know nothing about God our
> Creator choosing to enter this fallen world as a
> man, fulfilling the demands
> of the Law by living a sinless life, offering
> himself up as a vicarious
> sacrifice for the sins of humanity (past, present
> and future), rising from
> the dead, and now as our High Priest, sittiing at
> the right hand of God the
> Father. Clearly, therefore, we first need to believe
> what we read; the rest
> should follow. I suggest that the phenomena to which
> I allude must provide a
> positive stimulus to this end.
You are partially right and partially beside the
point. There are certainly copious non-canonical
writings of the church fathers that speak of Jesus.
The canonical New Testament is the best source of
primary data about Jesus of Nazareth, but it is not
the only data.
My main point was that bibliolatry is a great danger.
Some of the claims of numerics in the Bible border on
bibliolatry.
While scripture is foundational, the distinctive
characteristic of christianity is not faith in the New
Testament witness nor the Hebrew scripture witness to
Jesus of Nazareth but faith in that Jesus of Nazareth.
The Bible is inseparable from the person. IMHO these
numerics tend to split the Bible off from Jesus of
Nazareth who is the center of focus and faith.
Indeed, it is the living, risen Jesus of Nazareth in
each of our lives, in our corporate worship, etc. that
is the primary thing. Too much emphasis on the Bible
qua document tends toward bibliolatry.
> > >
> > >
> > > (2) The widely-experienced adverse reaction to
> the
> > > phenomena reveals a serious flaw in man's mental
> > > faculties. This of course is completely in line
> with
> > > biblical expectations - confirming, in
> particular,
> > > Jer.17:9 (which otherwise might well be
> considered
> > > unbelievable!)
> >
> > No disrespect intended, but one can use that logic
> as
> > proof of anything one wants to, no matter how
> > unbelievable to everyone.
> >
> > I am reminded of those who espouse conspiracy
> theories
> > who argue that the lack of evidence shows how
> > invidious and "good" the cover-ups are.
> >
>
> But in my experience it is usually the case that
> evidence (from whatever
> quarter) supporting one's views of this or that is
> eagerly accepted, and the
> donor thanked. Why should Christians, across the
> board (including AiG and
> Philip Johnson) treat these findings with revulsion?
> The data are real - as
> you will no doubt have discovered for yourself.
> Being a scientist you will
> know these lead, logically, to the first of my
> conclusions. I hope you will
> agree that there is something extremely odd about
> this situation. The only
> satisfactory answer to the enigma, I believe, is
> found in Scripture, as I
> have indicated.
I think revulsion is an overbroad characterization.
To the extent that anyone has expressed revulsion, I
think it probably is in response to the assertion that
such numerics are of foundational importance. I can
imagine that many people find the profound beauty of
christian-inspired art to be more inspirational than
claims of patterns and numerics in the Biblical text.
What I would suggest, IMHO, is that such things are
best considered to be filigree and they should be
judged based on the degree to which they point to the
center -- that is the living, risen Jesus of Nazareth.
I think that a lot of people whose response is less
than enthusiastic about such things is that it misses
the point or distracts from the point rather than
point to the point -- Jesus of Nazareth.
If it points to the Bible qua Bible, the danger of
bibliolatry is particularly present.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Nov 06 2003 - 17:57:20 EST