Re: [asa] Slug

Glenn wrote,
Other religions have 'hymns to creation" which are equally false, but for some reason [PHS: "for some reason"? Should meeting Jesus Christ and having your life transformed by his Spirit and word be written off as some mysterious reason?] we a priori rule their theology out. [PHS: It is not apriori; it is based on spiritual experience, historical probabilities, and other evidences found in any good evidentialist apologetics book] Heads we win; tails they lose. It is a wonderful self-delusional system. [PHS: To unbelief it is self-delusioinal]

GRM: The only way out is through verification. But that is what the 'scientists' on this list don't want--they don't want observational verification of statements in the Bible or any other sacred text for that matter.

PHS: I don't think this is true, but regardless, I am quite open to see verification of statements in the Bible. Why don't you give me verification for Genesis 1:6-8, where God splits a primeval ocean and puts half of it above the solid sky? And the ocean is still there today according to Psalm 148:4. So, I will be waiting for verification from you. I hope I do not have to keep asking you for this verification.

GRM: I find this odd. We say science is true because of the evidence, but theology is true in spite of the lack of evidence.

PHS: I think there is evidence for the truth of Christian theology, but you want some kind of observational evidence. So are you saying Christianity is false, or do you have observational evidence that God exists, that he is omniscient, that he is omnipotent, etc? If so, what is it? Show it to us.

GRM: And then there is the unwillingness of the accommodationalists to answer questions. I asked Paul how he tells a religion with true theology apart from one with false theology if both have bad science. No answer. Seems like a perfectly good question but I got no answer. I have asked it again. maybe this time I will get an answer.

PHS: I don't recall any such question except by inference. This is the first I have heard this question plainly asked. It's an easy question: To the extent a religion disagrees with Jesus Christ it is false. If unbelief wants to call that apriori, I leave it to God. A Day of Judgement is coming. If a person really needs more, there are good evidentialist books available to answer it.

GRM: I asked Burgy, if the events surrounding Jesus' birth are mere accommodations to the style of the day in which great astronomical events are said to occur at the birth of a great person. No answer. Seems like a perfectly good question, but apparently if it is ignored, people feel it will go away. No other accommodationalist decided to try to tackle that question either.

PHS: Well, now you have a chance to use my guideline. Is the idea in the culture of the day? Yes, as you say. Now, here is the rest of the guideline, Is there a scientific error? Until you can prove there is a scientific error, you cannot legitimately say the account is accommodated.
And there are two other issues which are implied in my guideline, but they could be overtly stated: The account one is dealing with must be prosaic, and the account cannot infer that the object in question was a miracle.. If one judges the account of the star over Bethlehem and the magi to be midrash in genre rather than prosaic history, questions about scientific errors and accommodation are irrelevant. [For your information, the story of the rock that followed the Israelites in the desert (I Cor 10:4) is midrash.] If you can prove the statements about the star involve a scientific error and that the account is not midrash and the star is probably not a miracle, you can say it was accommodated. If not, you cannot legitimately say it is accommodation.
So, now you tell us, Given the defined guideline, can the star of Bethlehem story legitimately be called accommodation or not? What is your answer? I am only asking you the same thing you asked Burgy. Could it be that maybe this is too complicated an issue to expect an instant answer? If not, what is the answer? And, if so, is it right to implicitly condemn those who do not give you an answer?

 Paul

   
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jun 16 01:37:15 2006