Re: Believe it even if it isn't true theology

From: Mervin Bitikofer <>
Date: Sun Feb 19 2006 - 08:04:12 EST

Glenn, Do you think the *parable* of the good Samaritan teaches any
truth? Or is Jesus only permitted to use non-fiction to make his point?

You are hung up on why some may look down their noses on Green slugism
or YEC. I'll happily take your bait and agree with you. Green slugism,
if it really existed, or other religions that do exist, must convey
considerable or at least some -- truth about reality and life. Even a
YEC gets a lot of things right (not the age of the earth, probably) but
a good many other things yes. Nobody is brilliant enough to construct
an entire religion, a substantial volume of literary works or complex
hermeneutical approach and get it 100% wrong.

I would remove the issue from its concentration on the purity of literal
correctness as a criteria for its legitimacy and focus instead on the
source from which the inspiration comes. I believe the Bible is a divine
message to us, mistranslated, and misapplied many times to be sure, but
still set apart from other works because of its ultimate source
(according to Christian faith). I may not think of any other written
works as being equal to the Bible in authority, but that doesn't mean I
have to look down my nose at them either. If the widows and orphans are
cared for (pause), the tongue restrained (ouch), and sensual
self-indulgences tempered (ouch again), then the applied system of
thought (even great green-slugism) as a religion is probably not all
bad, right? (Notice that salvation is not being discussed here.) But we
are no more compelled to insist on the literal scientific veracity of
'slugism' creation accounts than we are from our own Bible. (And a whole
different issue resides in my coupling of 'scientific' with 'veracity'
-- I don't really think science is the final judge of truth.)

If you only eat food with zero impurities, you will starve, Glenn.
Peanut butter may have x parts per million insect parts in it, but that
doesn't mean we can't rely on its nourishment or that peanuts were an
unfit creation. It just means our processing facilities aren't perfect.

Received on Sun Feb 19 08:09:51 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 19 2006 - 08:09:51 EST