In a message dated 8/14/01 6:30:06 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> However, having commented on my work (and his) in your original posting
> to Richard McGough, and said, "...(it is) probably worth discussing in
> a graceful, rational, theologically informed way.", I am somewhat
> surprised to find in your more recent "Is Jonah..." posting the
> "I suppose there is some (lesser) harm if Christians are seen as
> believing something silly, even if they make clear that the belief is
> not essential. Just as we should be willing to suffer for Christ but
> not suffer as wrongdoers, we should embrace the 'foolishness of the
> gospel' but eschew other, unrelated foolishness as a poor witness.
> Geocentrism and 144-hour creationism would be in that category; from
> some perspectives some other things under discussion here (like not
> seeing Jonah as a story, opposition to the theory of evolution,
> Biblical numerology) might also qualify."
> So much for a "graceful, rational, theologically informed" approach! It
> would appear that you have already decided the matter - and given it a
> 'thumbs down'. I am disappointed. I was expecting some cogent argument -
> based on sound scriptural principles and simple logic - that would force
> me to dig deeper and/or seriously consider the wisdom of what I was
> doing. Instead, you appear to lean on blind prejudice and imply some
> link with the occult!
Vernon, I'm sorry if what I said came across wrong, but I think you misread
what I wrote. I did not personally put your work in the "silly" category; I
said it was thus classified "from some perspectives" without necessarily
agreeing with those perspectives. And you must agree that, as evidenced by
various postings, "some perspectives" on this list view your work as
foolishness (some people say that in a "graceful, rational, theologically
informed" way and some in less edifying ways).
My point was about the possible harm of things advocated by Christians that
come across as "foolishness" (even if they don't go to the much more harmful
extent of claiming that the foolishness is essential). I named a few things
that *some* view as foolishness to illustrate the point, but it was not my
intention in this post to specifically disparage any of those items. Sorry
if I wasn't clear enough about that.
Dr. Allan H. Harvey, Boulder, Colorado | SteamDoc@aol.com
"Any opinions expressed here are mine, and should not be
attributed to my employer, my wife, or my cats"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 14 2001 - 21:47:59 EDT