The importance of concordism

From: glenn morton (mortongr@flash.net)
Date: Sun Jan 09 2000 - 03:15:08 EST

  • Next message: George Murphy: "Re: The importance of concordism"

    It is well known that I prefer a concordistic approach to the Scripture.
    This morning while reading the paper I ran into an interesting illustration
    of why concordism is important. It is from an article entitled "Faithful
    not worried about who said what in Columbine slayings" from the Houston
    Chronicle Sund Jan 9, 2000, p. 2A

    The article says:

    >>>>"Witnesses had said 17-year-old BErnall closed her eyes and clasped her
    hands in prayer when one of the gunmen pointed a shotgun at her and asked
    if she believed in God.
            Yes, she said--and he killed her.
            The story turned Bernall into a martyr who had found God after falling in
    with the wrong crowd, dabbling in the occult and experimenting with drugs.
            But more than eight months after the April 20 shooting attack the picture
    has become muddied.
            Authorities now say it was survivor Valeen Schnurr who professed her
    belief to gunmen Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. A similar story has also
    emerged about Rachel Scott, who died.
            Among Christians, however, some say the question is irrelevant.
            'It doesn't matter who said it or if no one said it,' Evans said. 'But if
    people believe in God, that's what's important.
            Doug Clark, director of field ministries of San Diego-based National
    Network of Youth Ministries, said he encourages other students to follow
    the teen-agers' example of boldness.
            'Mincing words over what was said in the library is a minor part,' Clark
    said, 'The greater part is how they lived their lives, and it's not going
    to change anything.
            REligious experts said attempts to clarify the confusion surrounding the
    stories of Christian faith actually could help embed the story in religious
    circles.
            'This rethinking can be chalked up to media scrutiny, which I think the
    faithful would dismiss as a cynical attempt to debunk the story,' said
    Randall Balmer, professor of American religious studies at BArnard College
            'In some ways, it may make the faithful dig in a little bit deeper and
    resist those attempts.'<<<<

    Without a doubt the story has had a tremendous impact on people's lives. I
    don't want to take away from that. But what bothers me is the cavalier
    attitude some have for the truth or falsity of the story itself. Have we
    taken a person who was not a Christian and turned them into a Christian
    martyr? I don't know and at this point only God really knows.

    But if this is the standard of truth that we Christians hold to, of what
    value are our statements? Trust is earned because one is trustworthy and
    represents things as they really are. When we don't care about the truth,
    why should anyone trust us?

    And this is why I believe that it does matter whether there is any
    historicity in Genesis. Not caring about whether it is 'true' or not is
    very similar to what may be happening with this Columbine story--truth is
    thrown out of the window in order to score quick points for our religion.
    If we do that, what separates us from the lowliest huxter?
    glenn

    Foundation, Fall and Flood
    Adam, Apes and Anthropology
    http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm

    Lots of information on creation/evolution



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 09 2000 - 09:10:12 EST