Allen makes the astounding assertion that "Glenn has uncritically
foundational assumptions of naturalism and all it's associated
that are the antithesis to sound Biblical thinking. "
The one word that stands out in the above, Allen, is the word
"uncritically." It is so much in contrast to what I know about Glenn as
to be ludicrous.
As you use it, I must assume that "sound Biblical thinking" must
necessarily conform to the particular interpretation that the earth is
<50K years old and that the flood of Noah's time was global. Since both
those assertions are contrary to factual knowledge, then the only
rational position for one to take who really believes the Bible teaches
them is that the Bible teaches falsehood and is, therefore, no more to be
trusted than the writings of Homer.
Sorry -- but I can see, except for Gosse's thesis, no other way out.
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 : Wed Feb 06 2002 - 12:52:09 EST