Re: Is Jonah to be taken literally?

From: Vernon Jenkins (
Date: Mon Aug 20 2001 - 16:29:27 EDT

  • Next message: Vernon Jenkins: "Re: Is Jonah to be taken literally?"


    Thanks for the 'opinion' and 'conjecture', but as I commented in an
    earlier post to Chuck, "Isn't Christendom in a confused enough state
    already?"! I'm left wondering what you make of "I am the way, the truth,
    and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (Jn.14:6).

    Your mentioning Gosse's OMPHALOS is most appropriate at this time. From
    my reading of the Scriptures, your suggestion that the concept of
    'apparent age' must, necessarily, imply divine deceit, is incorrect -
    indeed, the truth of the matter is far more subtle. However, since I am
    away on holiday from tomorrow, my thesis will have to wait a few weeks



    John W Burgeson wrote:
    > Vernon wrote, in part:
    > "So, while his Father in heaven may have withheld certain things - for
    > reasons best known to Himself - it is hardly likely that any Scriptural
    > errors would have remained unreported. Clearly, the Lord was provided
    > with all the information he needed to complete his earthly mission; and
    > that must have included a reliable testimony from Moses and the
    > Prophets."
    > Well, Vernon, that's what I would call a claim. Now what is your
    > argumentation (grounds) for it? Why is it "hardly likely?" Why "Clearly?"
    > Why "must have?"
    > What you have written is an opinion. You are entitled to it, of course,
    > but simply stating it does not give anyone reason to accept it.
    > This is my opinion. The Genesis creation accounts were written by an
    > unknown scribe about 400 to 600 years before Jesus was born. They were
    > accepted as "stories" by the Hebrews as they accepted most stories --
    > they did not really ask "did these things really take place as
    > described." They were like the hearers of Native American storytellers
    > who sometimes began their tales by saying, "Now I don't know if things
    > really happened this way, but I know that this story is true." As a Jew,
    > Jesus heard and understood these stories just as his friends and family
    > did. endopinion. For rational grounds, consult reputable Bible
    > scholarship.
    > This is my conjecture. Suppose Jesus WAS told by God at some point "Hey
    > son, you know those Genesis accounts? They are myth, not literal
    > history." How would Jesus have talked about them to his hearers? I
    > suggest he would NOT have passed that information on -- it would have
    > obscured his messages. endconjecture.
    > But, you will argue, they are NOT myths, but literal history. In which
    > case the arguments of the Bible fail, and Christianity becomes just
    > another interesting cult, for it implies strongly that the god who
    > inspired it must necessarily have been a deceiver, planting false
    > evidences of all kinds around pointing to a 4 BY earth. The only argument
    > that prevails against that is the one by Gosse in OMPHALOS, and it is my
    > observation that if I were a YEC the OMPHALOS position is the only one I
    > could have which could not be refuted by evidence available to everyone.
    > For anyone interested, materials on Gosse's Omphalos are available on my
    > website (page 2).
    > John Burgeson (Burgy)
    > (science/theology, quantum mechanics, baseball, ethics,
    > humor, cars, God's intervention into natural causation, etc.)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 20 2001 - 17:29:21 EDT