Re: Scholasticism...ENOUGH!!!!!

From: MikeSatterlee@cs.com
Date: Tue Jun 18 2002 - 18:17:24 EDT

  • Next message: Stephen J. Krogh: "RE: Scholasticism...ENOUGH!!!!!"

    Joel,

    You wrote: Can anyone who wishes to continue, please carry on about the
    historicity of Genesis, scholasticism, biblical estimates of the number of
    years between Adam and Jesus, and other such discussions on off-line? ...
    Jan's statement that Mike's reading of the bible is strange speaks for many
    of us ... The fact is that we live in two (or more) different intellectual
    universes ... that makes the prospect of useful dialogue so unlikely that we
    do not wish to attempt it, and we wince when someone else does. ... Jan,
    George, David, and others: Would you please resist the temptation to respond
    to these sorts of discussions. Your words will not be heard. It only fans the
    flames of fruitless discussions when you do.
      
    I found your words to be quite demeaning and insulting. If you are not
    interested in discussing some subject matters, for whatever reason, then
    don't. Read the topic line and move on. If you do not respect the intellect
    of some posters then do not read their posts. Read the byline and move on.
    Your lobbying others here against reading and/or responding to my posts was,
    to put it politely, quite crass. Simply because you may not agree with
    everything I write or understand everything in the way that I do is no reason
    to tell me to discuss certain topics off this list. I and many other
    Christians believe that subjects such as the historicity of Genesis, Bible
    chronology and the Bible's use of symbolic numbers are important for us to
    understand if we are to successfully defend the Bible and the Christian faith
    against those who say that the Bible cannot be trusted because it is filled
    with fables, scientific inaccuracies and superstitions.

    Understanding Bible chronology is also quite useful for other purposes. I am
    now writing an article, which I had intended to post to this list for peer
    review, containing information which confirms, in a most fascinating and
    scholarly way, the 5 BC date for Christ's birth, which Colin Humphreys
    article on The Star of Bethlehem, published at the ASA web site, has helped
    to establish. If I do post it here you may want to avoid it, since you not
    only see no value in discussing such matters but also feel that I occupy a
    different "intellectual universe" than yourself. That would, I believe,
    disqualify us as "peers."

    Mike



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 18 2002 - 18:18:18 EDT