Re: The death of the RTB model

From: <>
Date: Thu Feb 16 2006 - 18:35:41 EST

In a message dated 2/16/2006 3:53:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, writes:
If taking the incarnation seriously is "silly," then call me a fool. I think
I'm in pretty good company.
I see the flurry of posts coming in. I responded when someone said that
religion was a house of cards and that if we decided one story was an allegory then
even the resurrection would come crashing down. I find that assumption

So I described the "worst case scenario," NOT my belief, NOT my suggestion,
NOT my recommendation. I asked hypothetically - if tomorrow we were to have it
proved to us that Jesus was only a man, what would you do?

And you won't even face the worst case scenario. You are going to behave as
if I'm attacking my own religion because you wouldn't be able to handle it if
your faith was put to the ultimate test.

Noone said taking the incarnation seriously was silly. You are assuming an
attack on the incarnation because you haven't done the biblical study from a
scientific perspective and are afraid to make the step. If you don't take the
first step and cross over you'll never know what's on the other side. What's on
the other side is a rational validation of Christianity. The very thing
required to prevent the whole edifice from crashing down in the face of
postmodernism/globalism which is working overtime to destroy it to create the universal
state/religion that's the same everywhere for everyone to make us easy to manage.
Communism was their first attempt.
Look at the damage.

Last night my wife was praying from a prayer book she got from the Episcopal
church on 31st. Her meditation was based on John 10:19-30.
"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them and they follow me."

Why sheep? Have you ever heard the expression leading the lambs to the
slaughter? Sheep can be led to the slaughter because they behave instinctively and
don't know what's going to happen to them. They can't even imagine it because
they have an extremely limited consciousness of self. That's why the sheep hear
Jesus' voice and follow without hesitation like Abraham and Nachshon and
Jesus who does his father's will unto death. They follow instinctively, which was
the allegorical Adam's pre fall state when he did not have the knowledge that
there was good and evil because he could only do good instinctively, obey
God's will, like sheep.

So what?

You are not following Jesus instinctively, but conditionally. You follow on
the condition that you don't have to apply your reason to the texts, the reason
you got becuase of Adam's fall. I know its true because I see the refusals in
the posts. Because the very prospect of doing so is frightening and it was/is
because you are facing real and eternal death which is precisely what Jesus

There is nothing in any religious text from Genesis to revelation that
contradicts my Darwinian exegesis of Genesis in True Religion, the paper I've
offered to you all. Nothing. Anywhere in the texts.
I'm trying to introduce you all to Darwinian exegesis because once you "get
it" there is a shift in your understanding of the text, and you can see the
significance of Biblical morality, the very thing 90% of us are trying to protect
and that will give you an infusion of faith that will send chills up and down
your spines but you are afraid to take the first step.

Read the paper and ask me about it. Force me to defend my assertions, and I
will, but please, I put my faith in Jesus Christ completely and I can still
assume a scientific perspective when reading the texts.

Don't ever for one second suggest that I've said anywhere that the
incarnation is silly. It's not true.

I took the first step. That's why I started with Adam and Eve. More of you
need to be doing what I am doing. That's why I want to show you what I'm doing.
Help me. Get Ken Ham the validation he needs, which will certainly not come
from YEC or ID. If you are truly a group of Christian scientists you must take
up your cross. The Darwinian revolution is over a hundred years old and it is
running roughshod over religion. There must be rational arguments in its
defense and we needed them yesterday.
This IS the cross you bear because this is the cross that IS.

You all should join my company.

rich faussette
Received on Thu Feb 16 18:38:32 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Feb 16 2006 - 18:38:32 EST