First of all I see I have FOUR e-mail addresses for you. Do you use all
four?
I am sending this to all four plus EVOLUTION -- tell me which three (if
any) I should delete from my address book.
>>I believe in a single standard of truth;
I will only believe in that which actually happened. I don't hold much
stock in touchy feely interpretations of various books. Those 'truths'
obtained in that manner are subjective, not objective.>>
Hard for me to interpret what you say here. When scripture says "the
mountains clapped their hands," then you regard that section as false? Or
what?
When Jesus tells a story, need it be about real people to be meaningful?
"touchy/feely." You wife tells you she loves you and writes you a note to
that effect. A truth? Do you reject it since it is subjective.
You've given too easy an answer, my friend. You have said, in effect,
that unless Gen 1-11 is literal history, you are not interested in its
message. You have, in effect, told God under what conditions you will
listen to him!
>>I see no reason to believe revealed truth which is objectively
false. I would say that the proof of revealed truth is that it is
actually
TRUE. If something or some event revealed by a divine power didn't
actually happen in history, then we have been lied to. ... why should we
hold God to a lower standard?>>
What can I say. Your standard for scripture sets you up as the judge of
scripture. Scarey, I'd say.
>>But as I often point out, there are so many mutually exclusive
'theological' viewpoints (allegorical viewpoints) which can be seen in
the
text one must wonder if we are not merely seeing our internal
psychological
states in the theology we extract from the allegories?>>
Life is uncertain. So is the study of scripture. That's the process. Yes
indeed, one must sometimes wonder.
I am comfortable with that. You, it seems, are not. Why? Is not the
really important item the knowledge of God through Jesus Christ? And none
of us are going to know Him the same -- we all see God/Jesus through the
eyes of our own training and experiences. I don't see this as bad -- I
don't really see ant reasonable alternatives.
>>I really admire a person who lives consistently with their views. And
you
are being intellectually honest enough to admit my point that if PC is
irrelevant to Scriptural revelation, there is no point to being a PC. I
am
not being facetious here!>>
Understand your last sentence but not what goes before it. I am not a
"PC" as much as I am simply one who asserts that a PC position seems to
explain things better (at this point in my history) than known
alternatives. We are probably hung up here in language differences. When
I worked for IBM, I worked for IBM, I was NOT an IBMer! (At the time I
did not really recognize that difference).
But there IS a difference.
Peace ...
Burgy
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]