RE: sciDocument.rtf

From: Glenn Morton (
Date: Wed Jul 03 2002 - 23:04:30 EDT

  • Next message: D. F. Siemens, Jr.: "Re: sciDocument.rtf"

    > Still in conciliatory mode,

    I do need to comment, as many on this list will attest, that when I disagree
    with someone it is with the ideas presented and not with the individual. I
    have argued very strongly with many people on this list and others, but
    gladly go have a beer or a wonderful dinner with them afterwords--ask Bob
    DeHaan or even an older participant of the evolution list, Paul Nelson. So,
    while I labeled my last not as not being conciliatory, I did so because I
    knew it wouldn't be seen as such and because I was afraid that conciliation
    might be mistaken for mutual agreement when there isn't any.

    >You will agree that the mistakes in Leviticus are incidental the purpose of
    >the passage, so we are not talking about making things up out of whole
    >cloth. Rather, we are talking about accommodation to the needs of a Bronze
    >Age audience. I would argue that inspiration means that Go moves people to
    >write Scripture, but he works through people limited, by knowledge and
    >circumstances. (See my post, "Human Word of the Almighty God").

    And that is really the problem. If God can't get the science right in these
    fallible people, how can we possibly or even reasonably expect him to
    over-ride their silly theological misconceptions? See my note to Paul Seely
    today. It simply appears to me as a gross case of illogic to believe that
    only what we want to be true in Scripture (the theology) is correct while
    that which we think we can overlook (the abysmal science) is false and
    affected by fallable humans. Simple seems totally illogical and
    epistemologically ad hoc. I find it mystifying how university educated
    people can believe this.

    >I am not going to reply on your comments on Genesis, because we have had

    You don't get it. It is not about Genesis, not really. It is about
    hermeneutics and epistemology.

    >I would appreciate any comments on the rest of my post.

    And I would like comment concerning my apparent categorization in your mind
    as some one who wants every detail historically accurate. Is it easier to
    deal with me from that perspective or what?


    for lots of creation/evolution information
    personal stories of struggle

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 03 2002 - 16:55:29 EDT