Date: Fri May 16 2003 - 01:54:48 EDT
> Paul writes (to Dick)
> >When the YECs run into scientific data that would falsify their theory,
> >ignore it, distort it or find some other way to get rid of it. You are
> >the same with the biblical data.
> Once again, it appears an atheist is needed for some
> objectivity. Paul, I won't argue with your scholarship
> or all of the time you have put in to share your
> knowledge. Come on now, though. Your interpretation of
> Genesis is no less creative.
Actually I am agreement with the historical and modern consensual
interpretation of the Flood. And my approach to Genesis is not so very far
away from Calvin's, so not so creative as it may seem. Also, as I replied to
Gordon, it is rather close to Jesus in principle.
Since the commitment to the assumption that if God speaks he must get his
science and history right (he cannot accommodate his revelation to "the
notions which then prevailed" to use one of Calvin's phrases) is the basis
for YECism, concordism, and even your atheism, that assumption is the root
problem. I see no necessary biblical or logical basis for this assumption. It
is just human reason, man telling God on an apriori basis. what he can and
cannot say when inspiring Scripture, and then---whether YEC, concordist, or
atheist---creating imaginary worlds to uphold the assumption.
I invite you and all the YECs and concordists to surrender your autonomous
reason to the living Word.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri May 16 2003 - 01:55:08 EDT