Re: Some comments about an editorial in the latest Acts and

From: gordon brown (
Date: Tue Jan 07 2003 - 14:52:52 EST

  • Next message: John Burgeson: "Re: Jim: All truth is God's truth"

    On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, allenroy wrote:

    > I agree with him concerning the idea that the entire Bible is inspired,
    > not just parts we think deal with religious topics. However, I have
    > grave reservations with the idea that the individual words are inspired
    > and that the Bible is not the product of human reasoning. This would
    > make the writers merely mechanical 'court recorders' mindlessly
    > scribbling away on blanks of paper. I don't believe that this is what
    > the Bible means by inspiration. To me, biblical inspiration very much
    > involves human reasoning as the Holy Spirit moves on the thoughts of
    > intelligent believers to explain what they know of God. If the very
    > individual words are so important, why bother with human agents at all?
    > Why not just hand down His words on golden plates engraved by his own
    > finger?

    Anyone who believes that predestination and human freedom are not
    contradictory probably has no problem in accepting that the inspiration of
    individual words is not the same as dictation.

    > Dr. Morris then tries to defend his position that the 2nd Law of
    > Thermodynamics (2LoT) began with the fall of man. He states, "to assume
    > that the decay aspects of the entropy law were operating before the
    > Curse seems to be a tacit admission (perhaps unintentional) that death
    > was also operating before the Fall, and this clearly contradicts
    > Scripture (e.g., Romans 5:12; 1 Corinthians 15:21)."

    These are two more examples of Morris taking phrases out of context. The
    context indicates that these two verses are talking about the death and
    resurrection of humans. If we were to assume that death has to refer to
    the death of all living things, maybe we should also assume that the
    living refers to all living things so that Eve, who was said to be the
    mother of all living (Gen. 3:20), would be the mother of nonhumans also. I
    don't think even the YEC's would make such an interpretation.

    Gordon Brown
    Department of Mathematics
    University of Colorado
    Boulder, CO 80309-0395

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 07 2003 - 23:07:57 EST