Vernon Jenkins wrote:
> Thank you for these observations. However, I am completely at a loss
> understand why you should think I regard others on this list as
> and 'gross hypocrites'.
It isn't that difficult. If your claims are "self-evident" (which
I take to mean something like "obvious" rather than "analytic") then the
only explanations for the refusal of professed Christians to accept them
would be that they are
a) stupid, or
b) blinded by sin to an extent incompatible with genuine
> When you challenge my claim that 'I deal only in self-evident truths',
> you appear to be forgetting the nature of the truths to which I refer.
> Do I understand you to challenge simple numerical facts? - as for
> example the precise relationships between symmetrical form and number
> that represent a substantial portion of my findings?; or these recent
> discoveries relating to 'pi' and 'e'? It would help if you were to
> explain yourself a little more clearly here. Regarding my considering
> the possibility that I might be wrong, I have not - simply because
> are facts!
I.e., "I know I can't be wrong because I'm right." This
attitude makes it clear that there's nothing to be gained from further
> Clearly, it would appear that my recent posting has uncovered a
> psychological barrier (perhaps better known as 'cognitive dissonance')
> that some find hard to overcome. Thus, for no good reason (as far as I
> am aware), Michael and yourself regard my writings as 'offensive'.
> of course, implies that certain potentially interesting and important
> areas of investigation should be considered 'out of bounds' for the
> Christian. But is this really what Christ meant when he said, "...
> he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth..."
> (John 16:13)?
If your claims had any validity - which they don't - they would
be at most a way of calling attention to Scripture so that people could
hear its central message, which is Christ crucified. The fact that you
think that the Spirit of Christ is to lead us into truths about pi and e
being encoded in Bible verses shows that you have things precisely
backwards, & it's the consequent diminishment of the gospel which is
George L. Murphy
"The Science-Theology Dialogue"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 23 2001 - 07:29:48 EDT