Re: Today's blogs 2

I obviously need some clarification. What looks like a flat factual claim
does not have to be true, but the early chapters of Genesis must the
historical. However, the biblical chronology of ~6 Kya is superseded by
>5 Mya. Are the antediluvian genealogies accurate to any degree? What
about the genealogies from Noah to Abram? Did Noah have iron tools
available to build the Ark from his distant cousins? I understand the Ark
landed in an area properly designated as the mountains of Ararat. Most
important, what are the criteria for revealed truth that distinguish it
from biblical statements that are mistaken?
Dave

On Wed, 25 May 2005 18:38:15 -0400 <glennmorton@entouch.net> writes:
>>There is a different problem exemplified in your insistence on absolute
biblical accuracy and passing over my note on coneys (hyrax) and hares.
Please put the pieces together.<<<<

Sigh, Dave do you have a short term memory problem. I have over and over
said and I say it here again for about the 10th time with you that I
don't beleive that every detail has to be correct. But if at the root of
the issue there is no connection between what the Bible says and tangible
reality then there is little reason to beleive that the Bible holds some
really special stuff for us rather than believing that of the Book of
MOrmon. Or maybe we should believe every science fiction story we read.
There has to be an impact a connection between revelation and reality.
If there is none, you can't possibly know that you are even in the
correct religion. But like others you start with the assumption that
CHristinaity is correct and work from there. That makes your posiiton
fideistic in my book.
Received on Thu May 26 15:40:47 2005