RE: The Tower of Babel - Less Confusing

From: Debbie Mann (deborahjmann@insightbb.com)
Date: Wed May 21 2003 - 20:52:21 EDT

  • Next message: Debbie Mann: "RE: Prayer parallel?"

    You do realize that your syllogism in no way discredited God? It only points
    to God not having directly provided the extant versions of the Hebrew
    writings in their entirety.

    You want clear proof. No absolute proof exists. However, that does nothing
    to disprove much of anything.

    My husband frequently says, "How does anyone have enough faith to be an
    atheist? It requires an infinite amount of faith to believe in nothing."

    -----Original Message-----
    From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
    Behalf Of Jim Eisele
    Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 6:53 PM
    To: PASAlist@aol.com
    Cc: asa@calvin.edu
    Subject: Re: The Tower of Babel - Less Confusing

    Paul writes

    >Culture is not ultimate. I can show you people from all over the world,
    from every different culture who have met Jesus. They testify to the same
    thing I do: the new personal relationship with God transcends their cultural
    religious experience.

    Paul, we're not talking about final conclusive proof here.
    We're talking evidence. Many cultures have had many
    religions with all sorts of "real" religious experience.
    Every one thought they were right and the others wrong.
    That is strong evidence that Christianity is "just another religious
    experience."

    For me, when I substituted "understand and dominate" for "God"
    my "religious feelings" were exactly the same. It didn't
    take a holy spirit to recreate them.

    >> 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
    >> real).
    >> Conclusion: Therefore, Genesis is merely human work.

    >You have the rough materials here for a logical syllagism. But, this
    >reasoning is still not logically sound. You have a term in the conclusion,
    "merely
    >human work," that you do not have in either of the premises. Consequently,
    the
    >conclusion is logically invalid, illogical, irrational. Try again.

    Well, let's try this:

    A work credited to an omnipotent being of truth doesn't misrepresent
    reality.
    Early Hebrew writing (Genesis) misrepresents reality.
    Therefore, early Hebrew writing (Genesis) is not credited to
    an omnipotent being of truth.

    Also, you ignored my silliness/primitive comment on the fall.
    You are a very bright and experienced man, Paul. That will
    only take you as far as the evidence does.

    Jim



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed May 21 2003 - 20:47:39 EDT