Re: Seely's Views 2

From: <>
Date: Tue Aug 31 2004 - 12:43:58 EDT

Glenn wrote: "The only way we can be sure we are not a part of a long
running joke, a longer version of the Ilich Lenin in my heart routine, is
via some form of objective verification."

Glenn -- I found Don's little essay very much to the point and, I would
observe, from my own POV "right on target."

You say "The only way we can be sure ... is via some form of objective

1. We can't be sure. See Peat's "THE MYTH OF CERTAINTY." If absolute
certainty is the only thing that will satisfy you, I suggest you will
search for it w/o finding it all your life. Don't get me wrong. I'd LOVE
to have absolute certainty. But it seems that God has not (yet) offered
me that option.

2. "Inference to the best explanation" has generally satisfied me, for
such a belief is all I need to make DECISIONS. One of those decisions is
to follow the Christ as best I can. To do anything else simply says I am
not following the path that makes the most sense to me. Which is

3. I may be wrong. I am, perhaps, on a good day, 99.44% sure I am not
wrong, at least in my acceptance of Christ. To worry overmuch about the
missing 0.66% is not very productive. To study sources that favor the
0.66% possibility I, personally, find stimulating (in moderation). So
far, I have not encountered much really new (in a philosophical sense) in
those sources that I had not already considered in the years when I had
rejected Christ.

Your example of the Russian story illustrates that one CAN be misled in
these kinds of things. It does NOT suggest that this possibility is worth
seriously considering.

Again -- Inference to the best explanation. That precept explains why I
am not a YEC, although I once entertained the idea that the YEC viewpoint
was worth more than 0.66% (Currently, I still hold it to about a 0.01%
possibility level).

Read Don's excellent post again. Try to get inside his head. Try to argue
his point. A good lawyer, my learned barrister daughter tells me, knows
the opposing arguments very well -- and can argue them persuasively. You
need to be able to do that to understand them.

I confess I do not (yet) understand YOUR POV well enough to argue it
persuasively. I can do that, I think, with the ICR POV. But your
particular "search for certainty" (also see Casti's book by that title --
a review on my website at is one I rejected
as a youth -- long before I became a Christian.


Support our Troops! Get them a new Commanderi-in-Chief!

The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit to sign up today!
Received on Tue Aug 31 14:28:04 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Aug 31 2004 - 14:28:05 EDT