RE: Human origins and doctrine (was Definition of "Species")

From: Adrian Teo (
Date: Wed Feb 27 2002 - 13:33:05 EST

  • Next message: Adrian Teo: "RE: Human origins and doctrine (was Definition of "Species")"

    Hello again, John,

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: John W Burgeson []
    > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 1:44 PM
    > To:
    > Cc:
    > Subject: Re: Human origins and doctrine (was Definition of "Species")
    > Adrian wrote: "Perhaps so. However, one may be tempted to
    > take this line
    > of reasoning and argue that maybe ANY fundamental doctrines
    > of the faith
    > should also be
    > challenged including the Trinity, Christ as man-God, sola
    > Scriptura, etc.
    > Where do we draw the line?"
    > I cannot speak for anyone but myself, but I draw no line; any
    > doctrine is
    > open for challenge. To tuck one away as "I know for a fact
    > that this is
    > so" is to arbitrarily stop thinking at that point. I will not do that.
    > I have always told my students not to turn off their brains
    > when entering
    > the church. I happen to think this position is the only intellectually
    > respectable one to assume.
    > Recommended reading -- The Myth of Certainty, by Daniel Taylor.

    I am reminded of an article by David Snoke published in PSCF years ago, in
    which he argued against the myth of certainty. I am well aware of this line
    of reasoning, but nevertheless, I see a need to draw a line somewhere. If it
    is true that we cannot assume anything to be true (certain enough that it
    would be foolish not to believe it), then where do we even begin? Maybe the
    bible is all made up. Maybe all the historical witness to the existence of
    Christ is also made up. Maybe postmodernism is infecting us more than we

    Another point is that even if one were to adopt your open position of
    subjecting everything to reexamination, I think it is unrealistic to expect
    everyone to do so. How many people on this listserv (mostly very bright,
    thoughtful intellectuals) actually sat down and reexamined the principle of
    sola Scriptura, or the doctrine of the Trinity? How many actually took the
    time to read the historical arguments and examined their own
    presuppositions? How many spend time questioning everything that they have
    been tuaght to believe as true? I think it is clear that most people, most
    of the time, do not even question most of their beliefs, and if they did, it
    would lead many to despair.

    Some thoughts of mine for your consideration.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 27 2002 - 13:33:43 EST