Subject:
|
Re: Science and beliefs (was Re: Alien races)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 9 Apr 2001 18:07:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
662 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Simpson wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
>
> > A few other basic problems with the literality of the Bible:
> >
> > - Which translation?
>
> IMO, the issue of interpretation and translations and so forth is, at a
> fundamental level, very simple: Reasonable, well-intentioned, well-informed,
> open-minded inquiry is a root necessity of any fruitful scholarly, literary,
> scientific, moral, religious, etc., etc. intellectual endeavor. At the very
> warp and woof of the issue, at some point one has to make a seasoned value
> judgment and to simply say: "I must trust my faculties in this matter, and
> thusly I conclude...." We shall never find any authoritative work that is
> beyond reasonable criticism. At some point we must apply serious, but humble,
> judgment in a matter. I judge the Bible to be reliable and trustworthy for a
> number of reasons. At the very heart of things, I do not *know* in the same way
> that I know that I exist that the Bible is reliable; but, somewhere I must reach
> a foundation upon which I state "Here am I and here I stand."
Unfortunately, your stated position doesn't jive with the position stated
by Ryan: "I believe the Bible to be literal truth about the universe!".
The two statements are different. Not saying that either of you is more
correct, just pointing out that they are different.
> There are indeed contradictions, noteably that Gospel writers record some events
> in different sequences. Some inconsistencies are those such as two very
> different accounts of Judas' death. Most of the inconsistencies are, IMO, of
> small concern, although no doubt others would disagree with me. I have seldom
> noted, however, contradictions that gave me theological pause. I do not believe
> in the inerrancy of scripture, but I do believe that it is divinely-inspired,
> and to that end I believe the books to display a very high degree of consistency
> in terms of theological content; that which the Church (i.e., the universal body
> of believers) likes to call the Harmony of Scripture.
Actually, a "Gospel harmony" or "Harmony of the Gospels" is a specific type
of analytical work, where the four gospels are physically juxtaposed
(usually in columns) to show where they are alike, and where they differ.
They are good books to study, if one cares to look for inconsistencies in
scripture...
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Science and beliefs (was Re: Alien races)
|
| (...) We had a minister use one of these once in a service. That was one of the most memorable services I've ever attended. It was Palm Sunday, and the minister read us the relevant passages from two of the gospels, then he had us act out the (...) (24 years ago, 9-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Science and beliefs (was Re: Alien races)
|
| (...) IMO, the issue of interpretation and translations and so forth is, at a fundamental level, very simple: Reasonable, well-intentioned, well-informed, open-minded inquiry is a root necessity of any fruitful scholarly, literary, scientific, (...) (24 years ago, 5-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
126 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
