From: Jim Eisele (email@example.com)
Date: Sun May 18 2003 - 20:34:57 EDT
>Of course I have other reasons for believing. I make no apology for that.
Nor do I expect you to. And I generally just try to post
here "within a Christian framework." You guys just need
to surrender Genesis. It's a thorough embarrassment for
>I have met Jesus Christ. He by his Spirit changed my life. He by his Spirit
moves in my life. But, this is not purely subjective. If I have to give a
reason for the hope that is within me, I >can point to the acts of God in
history--both in my life and in the lives of others who have met >him, seen
most definitively in his resurrection which rests upon the testimony of eye
witnesses. >There is an objective as well as a subjective basis for my
faith. He is there and he is there for those who surrender their lives to
him----including you. This includes surrending your rationalism, not your
reason, but your rationalism, your FAITH that you can know about God by
I like to respect people's experience. But your experience
would be vastly different if you were born in a different
culture. How do you explain that?
>>You want to be resonable? OK. Let's take your reasoning above. God spoke
words shown to be (scientifically) inaccurate. From this premise you draw
the conclusion that therefore these were merely human words. OK. Put this in
a logical syllagism. You have only given us the Major premise and the
conclusion. What is the minor premise? The validity of the conclusion is
contingent upon the minor premise. Without a sound minor premise, you do not
have a logical conclusion, you do not have a truly reasonable conclusion.>>
Major premise: The Bible/church says God doesn't lie, God is truth, etc.
Minor premise: Genesis misrepresents reality to humans (a lie if God were
Conclusion: Therefore, Genesis is merely human work.
>Since your statements imply that your current religion demands that you not
rest your faith on subjectivity, along with giving us the minor premise,
give the proof that the minor premise is not just special pleading, is not
just based upon subjectivity. Give the objective scientific basis that the
minor premise is resting on.>
People used to take Genesis factually (objective enough?) Science
supplanted Genesis. Not only that, but Genesis is just silly/primitive.
It blames humanity's problems on a single action from a single couple
that didn't even have knowledge of good and evil.
>You've come a long ways, from YEC to atheism,
So how do you really feel about YEC, Paul ;-)
Of course, I wholeheartedly agree :-)
>I applaud your growth. But, so far all of your religions have rested upon
the same minor premise. Now let's see what that minor premise is resting on,
especially as found in atheism. I'm >not after winning an argument. I'm
after you. You want to be ABSOLUTELY honest? I want you to be absolutely
honest too, and I have no doubt that God wants this too. He is light and in
him is >no darkness at all.
Whoops, you just caught me at a bad moment. Another list
just censored a thread that shows how the Bible supports
Christianity is a false eschatological movement. Sorry,
Paul, those "light" words ring very hollow at the moment.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun May 18 2003 - 20:37:53 EDT