Re: BIBLE/ORIGINS: seeking feedback

From: Don Winterstein (
Date: Thu Feb 13 2003 - 02:10:04 EST

  • Next message: Don Winterstein: "Re: Random from Professing evolution column"


    Unfortunately, because of my predisposition, prejudices, etc., the information you present doesn't mean much to me. God may indeed communicate in codes of the sort you're working with, but if so, it's not the way I know him or would want to.

    A question that immediately pops into my head is, if that's what's in Genesis 1:1, what's in Genesis 1:2, and so on? Or, using the same methods, what might an enterprising person find in this sentence or in any other chosen at random?

    In my opinion God wants us to respect the Bible but to treat it as much less important than a personal relationship with him. Although I enjoy the first ten chapters of Genesis and think I detect the same divine inspiration in them that pervades other scriptures, I believe Christianity as a whole might be better off ignoring those chapters in our time because they cause so much fuss and conflict that they distort the thrust of the entire Bible. Of course, I'm well aware people are not going to ignore them, because they provide a framework for everything that follows. But what is that framework worth in our day? Everyone who knows the real world has to reinterpret those chapters so drastically (or slide past them, as I do) that, in my opinion, they really no longer provide anything like a useful framework.


      As you may remember, I wrote (Jan 27) the following in response to your posting of Jan 24:

      In view of what you have written (in particular, your recommendation that we "would be better off ignoring the first ten or so chapters of Genesis"), I am wondering how you would proceed to adapt your paradigm to accomodate the hard facts that are indelibly associated with the prologue to these chapters. I have prepared an illustrated summary of these which you may find at

      The empirical evidence I have put together under the heading "The Ultimate Assertion" is no figment of my imagination - as I'm sure you would agree. Genesis 1:1 is manifestly the most remarkable combination of words ever written - and a standing miracle. It surely follows that all theories relating to origins must take account of that - otherwise they become so much 'hot air'. Are you now prepared therefore to retract your recommendation that the early chapters of Genesis be committed to the scrap heap?



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Feb 13 2003 - 02:08:16 EST