Re: Non-truths that do not transform

> Gordon,
>
> I have interleaved my comments below.
>
> > On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Vernon Jenkins wrote:
> >
> >> So I suggest that you (and others) who reject the biblical account of
> >> creation and of earth history (having, in effect, already judged God, and
> >> found him wanting) are being tested by these 'wonders in the heavens'.
> Such
> >> 'theatricals' are clearly within the scope of a being who delights to
> >> deceive - and, for reasons which are completely beyond our understanding,
> is
> >> being _allowed_ to deceive. As Christians, it is wise that we always
> >> remember that His thoughts and ways are completely beyond our own. He has
> an
> >> _agenda_; whether we like it or not, its fulfilment inevitably involves
> us!
> >>
> >> Vernon
> >
> > Vernon,
> >
> > I find it to be very unfortunate that you accuse everyone who disagrees
> > with your interpretation of some passages of Scripture of rejecting the
> > authority of the Bible.
>
> But are you not rejecting the authority of the Bible when,
>
> (a) You deny Ex.20:11 confirms the matter of a 6-day creation, followed by a
> day of rest?
>
> (b) Since evolution is an on-going process, it clearly is _never_ completed?
>
> (And how is one to understand the 'day of rest' in this context?)
>
> (c) You dispute the creation of the 'fowls of the air' (Gen.1:20-22)
> _before_ the land fauna
> (Gen.1:24, 25) - in particular, the reptiles? (How can errors of this kind
> be attributed to
> a Sovereign Creator who uses evolution to achieve HIs ends?)
>
> (d) You reject the problems of logic associated with belief in a _local_
> flood?
> (These were aired recently and remain without effective rebuttal.)
>

So obviously you accept geocentricism, unless you want to reject the
authority of
the Bible, or rather what you think is the authority is the authority of the
Bible.

He established the earth upon its foundations, so that it will not totter,
forever and ever.
- Psalm 104:5
    
The world is firmly established, it will not be moved.
- Psalm 93:1 & 1 Chronicles 16:30
    
For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he set the world on them.
- 1 Samuel 2:8
    
Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the
Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel,
sun stand
thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, moon upon Ajalon - Joshua 10:12

Note that Joshua tells the sun to stop moving, not the earth to stop rotating
on its
axis. If you reject this, then you are contradicting your own dogmatic
interpretation
of Sola Scripture, and using modern science.

> >
> > You have accepted the Seventh Day Adventist version of the Flood and
> > defend it even where it conflicts with the Biblical account. On this list
> > you have denied that the Bible really meant it when it told us where the
> > Garden of Eden was located by listing the rivers that were the sources of
> > its water.
>
> I am swayed more by the wording of the Flood Narrative than by any supposed
> SDA influence.
> Just recently, I drew attention to the Apostle Peter's reference to the
> event (2Pet.3:6) which
> suggests, beyond reasonable doubt, that to translate the Hebrew word 'eretz'
> as 'land' rather than
> (planet) 'earth' amounts to a distortion and a 'wresting of the scriptures'
> (2Pet.3:16,17).
>
> Concerning the matter of the river courses: I believe that such was the
> ferocity of the Mabbul that
> the physiography of the whole earth would have been changed, and a
> completely new system of
> continental drainage established. The fact that the name of a former river
> might be associated with
> another, following the flood, is no proof that this was a quiescent and
> local affair.
>
>
> You have told us that either God or Satan fixed the creation so
> > that it bears false witness to God's creative activity. Can you imagine
> > how the great defenders of the Scriptures during the first 18 centuries of
> > Christianity would have reacted to such assertions?
> >
> > I think that one of the most important aspects of defending the Scriptures
> > is defending it against the charge that its teachings are nonsense. For
> > Christians to embrace nonsense is counterproductive to this defense.
>
> Gordon, I look forward to hearing your comments on the matters raised above.
>
> Vernon
>

Christopher
Received on Tue May 3 14:56:25 2005