Re: The Tower of Babel - Less Confusing

From: Jim Eisele (
Date: Fri May 16 2003 - 20:23:43 EDT

  • Next message: Dick Fischer: "Re: The Tower of Babel - Less Confusing"

    Paul writes

    >Hi Jim,
    >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
    >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.
    >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.

    Hi Paul,

    Again, I don't challenge your scholarship. I have found it
    right on target. I probably wasn't specific enough in my
    post. Part of that is that your reasoning on Genesis seems
    so odd to me that I have a difficult time stating your

    You want to say God provided inaccurate information to
    the Hebrews because they couldn't handle accurate information.

    I really can't justify such a position. As for reason,
    I find it keeps me from error.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri May 16 2003 - 20:24:20 EDT