From: Dr. Blake Nelson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Jan 05 2003 - 22:55:39 EST
The three examples you cite are nowhere definitively
stated in any biblical text. They are assertions by
those conducting exegesis on the biblical texts, based
on their particular sets of assumptions.
They are not and have never been Christian dogma (in
the technical, not common, sense of the word). Nor
have they ever been theologically of any importance of
which I am aware. Thus, they have no impact on
whether Christianity is true or false in light of
Thus, you've failed to state anything about
christianity that science has called into question.
--- Jim Eisele <email@example.com> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> >> After all, science has forced major
> reinterpretations of
> >> "God's Biblical truth."
> >Sorry Jim I know I am a bit thick but what major
> interpretations has
> >science forced on Biblical Truth?
> >Can please itemise each one ?
> >Happy New Year
> >and Happy epiphany
> Just when I thought we were (almost) all on the same
> page with
> science and the Bible :-) OK...
> 1. Young earth
> 2. Geocentrism
> 3. Flat earth
> Now are you going to make me get into a debate over
> how scientific
> and historical inaccuracies bring the credibility of
> the Bible into
> question? You know that I'll get bored without a
> big, juicy
> debate ;o)
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jan 06 2003 - 01:46:06 EST