RE: Do animals ever "sin" (was something else)

From: Adrian Teo (
Date: Fri Feb 08 2002 - 12:41:18 EST

  • Next message: Jan de Koning: "RE: Do animals ever "sin" (was something else)"

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Jan de Koning []
    > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 9:04 AM
    > To: '
    > Subject: RE: Do animals ever "sin" (was something else)
    > At 07:51 PM 06/02/02 -0800, Adrian Teo wrote:
    > If I
    > understand your
    > >view correctly, then each individual become the final
    > arbiter of truth for
    > >himself/herself.
    > That is always the case. I know only a little Greek and
    > Hebrew. A friend
    > of mine, who became a medical doctor, told me: "Jan, you and
    > I have brains.
    > We should read, check the bible in the original languages."
    > I must admit
    > that he kept it up longer than I did, but a basic knowledge
    > of Greek and
    > Hebrew is certainly possible for everyone that studies. It
    > does not always
    > guarantee that you are coming to the same conclusions, but it
    > is much more
    > interesting than to listen only to modern interpreters.
    > Yes, each individual believer is responsible for his own
    > Scripture reading,
    > but together we can talk about it. Obviously one's teachers
    > have a lot of
    > influence, and it will certainly be difficult to change
    > once's opinions
    > fast. If that happens something is wrong.

    The logical conclusion to such an position is that no one of us have the
    assurance that any of our doctrines are correct, and no one can claim to be
    more right than any one else. This seems to me to be a recipe for mass
    confusion. What good then is there for me to take time to study the bible,
    when I know my conclusions are going to be different from another person's
    and I also know that I don't know who's right?

    > Seeking the counsel in history is good, but then you should
    > not go to the
    > earliest Christian philosophers, but to early "theologians"
    > like Paul,
    > Peter, John, etc. The earliest Christian philosophers were
    > more going back
    > to Aristotle than to Plato. They certainly were not very
    > unified in their
    > thinking. Also, Dogmatics only started in the second
    > century, not in the
    > first century. Right from the start they had rather severe
    > disagreements:
    > Origines contra Celsus. (I looked that up again.)

    The Greek influence was there prior to the time of Jesus already.
    > I don't say that you have to reject certain interpretations
    > because they
    > are based on certain Greek philosophies, though I do warn
    > that the Greek
    > philosophers before the Christian era are pagans, all of
    > them. According
    > to some Plato's philosophy was closest to the Bible. I
    > disagree. Others
    > said "closer to Aristotle". others take other philosophers
    > again. For
    > that reason, Vollenhoven wrote in 1934 a booklet titling it
    > (I translate)
    > "The necessity of a Christian Logic."

    I guess the question to ask is whether Christians have a monolpoly on truth,
    or can even pagans discover truth on their own.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 08 2002 - 12:43:05 EST