> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
> Behalf Of John Burgeson
> Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 7:05 PM
> Glenn wrote: "Liberals accept science but make the Bible little
> more than a
> fairy tale and conservatives make fools of themselves by denying what is
> clearly before their eyes. It all makes one wonder if Christians
> would know
> the truth if it hit them in the face!"
>
> As a practicing "liberal," I have to take issue with that, Glenn.
>
> "little more than a fairy tale" is a phrase that predetermines the outcome
> of your argument.
Are these creation stories to be treated as 'liberals' treat the Bible--as
true in a different sort of way?
Arnhem land
" In one version of the myth of the Wawalik sisters, the sisters, with
their two infant children, camped by the Mirrirmina waterhole. Some of
the older sister's menstrual blood fell into the well. Yurlunggur
smelled the blood and crawled out of his well. He spit some well water
into the sky and hissed to call for rain. The rains came, and the well
water started to rise. The women hurriedly built a house and went
inside, but Yurlunggur caused them to sleep. He swallowed them and their
sons. Then he stood very straight and tall, reaching as high as a cloud,
and the flood waters came as high as he did. When he fell, the waters
receeded and there was dry ground. "[Buchler]
Toltec (Mexico)
" One of the _Tezcatlipocas_ (sons of the original dual god) transformed
himself into the Sun and created the first humans to show up his
brothers. The other gods, angry at his audacity, had Quetzalcoatl
destroy the people, which he did with a flood. The people became fish. "
Or are they little more than fairy tails? I strongly disagree with you that
my appelation predetermines the outcome. So if I shouldn't be offering only
two possiblities, tell us what is the status of these two creation
accounts???
>
> And not all conservatives deny the evidence.
Name a major conservative, Christian writer who does not deny either the
obvious age of the earth, or evolution! I would like to see you do that.
>
> By polarizing the question, you make it difficult to discuss.
The issues make discussion difficult.
>
> For this "liberal," and I really don't like the label very much, the
> "language of appearance" argument takes care of many of the apparent
> problems.
Burgy, if you don't like the label, don't apply it to yourself. I certainly
didn't apply it to you. :-)
I think it is very important that you answer the question of the
truthfulness of the creation stories above--are they to be treated on par
with the Biblical account or are they fairy tales, or are they real accounts
of what happened, or are they God's revelation to man?
Rather than 2 choices I gave you 4.
glenn
see http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
for lots of creation/evolution information
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 09 2000 - 17:55:42 EST