RE: Seely's Views 2

From: Alexanian, Moorad <>
Date: Fri Sep 03 2004 - 19:10:00 EDT

One must distinguish between what is written in Scripture and our interpretation of it. I personally dwell on things that I can understand and realize that there is much that we presently cannot understand. I accept my ignorance and am happy to deal in the things that I can understand. It is very much the same in science where one does the problems that one is capable of solving and not waste time with problems that are beyond one's ability. I concentrate on who Christ is and what He did on the cross for me. Of course, one wants to put together a coherent picture of the physical and the nonphysical aspects of reality. I believe the Christian faith does a pretty good job of it.


From: Glenn Morton []
Sent: Fri 9/3/2004 10:08 AM
To: Alexanian, Moorad;;
Subject: RE: Seely's Views 2

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexanian, Moorad []
> Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 11:18 PM

> There is a sort of uncertainty principle when it comes to God
> interacting with His creation. If God is to explicit, then
> there is no need of faith and all is certainty. God seems to
> do it just right so that faith is required by humans to
> reconcile themselves to His truth.

We can never escape from the fact that everything we know is based upon
faith, even if it is at the level that we have to have faith that our
sense data is telling us the truth, i.e., we aren't brains in a box
wired up to a virtual reality machine. But faith is different than
intentionally misleading people. One can't ask people to have faith in
a story that we intentionally misled people and expect to have another
important item requisite for the Christian life--TRUST. Let's say that
I tell you that yesterday I caught a 32 lb red snapper which is 2 lbs
less than the Texas state record. One thing anyone who knows me, knows,
I have been fishing about 3 times in my life--I hate fishing. Do you
believe that that is real history? Am I misleading you? Your reaction
will be based upon whether or not your TRUST me.If I have misled you
before you will be less likely to trust me. If I am a known Texan
Braggadocio, you will be less likely to believe me. Probabilities
would certainly argue against such a claim. So, do you believe me? Have
I told you real history or is this merely an illustration?

  If God did give us a faulty lab manual to use, then as far as I can
see there is no way we humans can ever engage in enough critical
thinking to know what is right from what is false. Thus one can't TRUST
that one ever got it right. One would not be able to TRUST God. To me,
such a picture, where God uses falsehood to convey truth--especially
when in an unclear literary setting, is a picture of a very perverse
Received on Fri Sep 3 19:47:53 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Sep 03 2004 - 19:47:54 EDT