Re: NT truth (formerly inerrancy?)

From: <sweitzer@bee.net>
Date: Thu Jan 01 2004 - 14:36:01 EST

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some comments from a lurker:

****** Sheila posted:
2 Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching,
rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God
may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

****** "D. F. Siemens, Jr." responded:
Sheila,
This verse speaks primarily, if not totally, of morality. It mentions
nothing about scientific or historical correctness in the modern sense. It
is taken as a proof text for infallibility, but this is eisegesis.
Dave
 

****Sheila responded:
This is not eisegesis - a rather new and
> > exciting word to me personally. The
> > chapter (2 Timothy 3) does speak
> > primarily of morality and truth:
 
> > v.7: "always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth."

> > The truth is not some ephemeral concept that
> > changes with the whims of man. Jesus
> > Christ said He was the way, the truth,
> > and the life. Truth is based on God
> > alone. Truth is determined by God and for
> > God in all things; therefore, truth also
> > applies to science, history, and the Bible.

> > Whether we know or acknowledge the truth,
> > truth does not change. Because God is
> > not a man that He should lie and all

I see no support here for God being allowed to lie through his creation.
And all around us, we see a creation that looks very, very old.

> > scripture is God-breathed, then we must
> > interpret everything, including science,
> > through scripture AND through God.
> > Remember, I do not have the answers.
> > This is much more broad than young/old
> > earth creation or evolution or anything
> > else. I know the Bible is interpreted
> > many different ways but any way that we
> > think is correct must align with
> > scripture. This includes science.

I see the problem with the YEC position is that they are interpreting
scripture and God with a strong & unrecognized set of preconceptions. IMO,
the role of the YEC leadership (i.e., those driving the debate, not those in
the pew nodding in agreement) is like that of the traditionalist clergy at
the time of the reformation who regarded church tradition as an equal (or
greater) authority to scriptures. They have deified their image of God,
limited him to their own understanding, and demand that others think in the
same way.

> > The very next chapter (2 Timothy 4) says
> > in v. 3-5:
> > "For the time will come when men will not
> > put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to
> > suit their own desires, they will gather
> > around them a great number of teachers to
> > say what their itching ears want to hear.
> > They will turn their ears away from the
> > truth and turn aside to myths. But you,
> > keep your head in all situations, endure

To be blunt, I don't see Young Earth Creationism as sound doctrine, but
rather the accumulation of centurys of tradition. Modern science has
uncovered a wealth of facts which contradict YEC conclusions, and their
response has been to twist scientific data to suit their desires.

Many ears itch for a prophetic voice of 'thus saith the lord', and the YEC
leadership steps up to provide it. People can sit back in their pew feeling
smug and thinking that their god is big enough to make the earth in 6000
years and that scientists who think otherwise are merely deluded. But the
fact is that it takes a far bigger God than the one in their box to create
the world with natural processes (including evolution).

Sorry to be so blunt in speaking the truth in love, but (IMO) this verse
cuts againts the YEC position, not for it!

Grace & peace,

D
Received on Thu Jan 1 14:36:16 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 01 2004 - 14:36:17 EST