From: John W Burgeson <email@example.com>
> 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,
Your "factual knowledge" is really "evolutionary interpretation of the data
within the assumption of the mythology of Naturalism." This lack
discernment between fact and interpretation is the very thing which Morton
(and you) seems to be incapable of comprehending. Within "sound Biblical
thinking" means that scientifically acquired data is interpreted within the
Biblical paradigm. Thus the bible is the basis for interpretation of the
data. It is read as it makes sense without the need to try to reinterpret
the Bible to fit the assumptions of mythological Naturalism.
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.
The only rational position for one to take who really believes the Bible
teaches them is that interpretations of the data within the myth on
Naturalism must be false and no more to be trusted than sifting sand.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 06 2002 - 23:56:36 EST