From: Dick Fischer (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Jun 03 2003 - 10:26:54 EDT
Debbie Mann wrote:
It's one thing to say that some of the Bible may be allegorical or
explained in terms of false scientific premises. It's something else
entirely to say that no matter when it was written or who wrote it we can
take the pretty parts and leave the rest alone. Some of it begs for
interpretation. Other parts don't. I believe it was Jenkins who said, when
you can - take it literally.
Where does it start Debbie? When apologists think they have to explain
away parts of the Old Testament because they aren't dedicated enough to
figure it out or even listen to someone who has, that establishes a pattern
which can carry right into the New Testament.
Add that to our innate feelings of compassion for all people everywhere,
and you have a watered-down gospel - acceptable to any shade of faith and
all categories of unrepentant sinners.
I argue hard for a literal Genesis illuminated by historical evidence not
because it is important in and of itself, but because that too can
establish a pattern of taking the entirety of Scripture at full face value.
Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jun 03 2003 - 10:30:31 EDT