RE: FW: YEC Destroying Faith

From: Glenn Morton <glennmorton@entouch.net>
Date: Tue Apr 27 2004 - 06:43:03 EDT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. [mailto:dfsiemensjr@juno.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 9:58 PM
> To: glennmorton@entouch.net

> Sorry, Glenn, to have misinterpreted your view. However, I do
> not see how the mere fact of being historical allows for
> error. If I quote Satan's words as authoritative scripture,
> I'm arguing for a lie. But this is a misrepresentation of
> what scripture says. The proper quotation of Satan by the
> author of scripture does not represent a lie.
>
> However, putting words in your mouth has some interesting
> effects. Dave

Yeah, it puts the caplocks on. :-) What I am saying now I have said
many times before but once again, people don't listen. They prefer their
familiar categories. Here is what I mean by historicity.

Take the Flood account. It must be based upon a real history. It can't
have been made up whole cloth. I don't care if Noah took 2 or 200 pairs
of each kind on the ark. Details can be wrong, but there must be a real
history behind it. Same with the creation account. If it is made up
whole cloth, then it is no better than the story of the peapod man, an
actual creation story, of, I believe, a tribe of Native Americans. Since
evolution is true, if the creation account contains no means of seeing
it in that light, save as purely alegorical, then the Scripture has no
merit. What I see people doing is making Genesis 1-2 to be totally
irrelevant to what actually happened, because I see no historicity in
what they say that Genesis states. Paul Seely's approach, that God
accommodated truth to the false science of that time, leaves me
wondering if there is any historicity in the account at all. Homer's
story of Troy is a case in point. Many details were probably wrong, but
it was based on real history. That is what I mean by historicity. I
don't care if there are minor errors because there probably are in both
the form of copyist errors and errors of fact. But to leave all
historicity out of the account, is fatal to Christianity as far as I can
see, because it leaves us with a God who either can't communicate truth,
won't communicate truth or doesn't know truth if He saw it. That makes
me very uncomfortable about the usefulness of such a god.
Received on Tue Apr 27 06:43:49 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 27 2004 - 06:43:51 EDT