Hi Michael
Thank you for this timely and (at times) all to neccessary reminder, at least
for .e
Blessings
Jon
Michael Roberts wrote:
> I have felt uneasy about some of these exchanges. We need to think who is
> the person sending the e-mail, which may or may not be rubbish. It may be a
> weak or struggling Christian who is asking desperate questions as they have
> problems with their faith. Thus we need to be gentle in our response.
>
> But if it is a regular e.g. Glenn, Jon. George, Howard etc we can be more
> agressive and shoot from the hip. I dont think I could unsettle them in
> their faith, but I still need to be reasonably polite. I can be robust.
>
> There must be many who are on thsi listserve who are struggling in their
> faith. They need our help and at times we need to avoid going for them too
> robustly. We can reserve our pungent replies to the above mentioned and
> myself.
>
> There is no point winning an argument if we lose a soul and probably ours as
> well.
>
> To Jim a motto from Herbert Butterfield a Christian historian of the last
> generation,
>
> "Hold on to Christ, and for the rest be uncommitted"
>
> Remember it is the first sunday of lent tomorrow.
>
> Michael
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Eisele" <jeisele@starpower.net>
> To: "Walter Hicks" <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>; <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 3:00 PM
> Subject: FW: Genesis One and Concordism (was a lot of other things
> previously)
>
> > BTW, Walter, feel free to jump in on any e-mail addressed to me. I don't
> > have anywhere near close to enough time to respond. Thanks to everyone
> for
> > their great participation (and forgiveness!!!!) -Jim
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jim Eisele [mailto:jeisele@starpower.net]
> > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 2:41 PM
> > To: Walter Hicks; asa@calvin.edu
> > Subject: RE: Genesis One and Concordism (was a lot of other things
> > previously)
> >
> >
> > I am not trying to "form an alliance" to vote everyone else off the
> island.
> > But Walter has done it again!!! I read up to "astronauts" and got very
> > convicted.
> > Did this happen to anyone else?? -Jim (thank you, thank you, thank you
> > Walter)
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
> > Behalf Of Walter Hicks
> > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 6:13 PM
> > To: Jim Eisele
> > Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> > Subject: Re: Genesis One and Concordism (was a lot of other things
> > previously)
> >
> >
> > Before anyone gets too excited, someone corrected me on the usage of the
> > phrase "jump my bones". That part is retracted.
> >
> > Back in the late 60's, Eric Von Daniken wrote a book called "Chariots of
> > the Gods?". I DO NOT ENDORSE THIS BOOK!. However, the author voices the
> > opinion that humans were visited by astronauts and they were told by
> > them how the earth and humanity came about. As best they could, they
> > remembered this story and repeated it from generation to generation.
> > They wrote it down when they had learned how to write. (A recent
> > Discovery Channel presentation attributed the first books of the Bible
> > to Moses since he learned to write in Egypt.)
> >
> > Replace the astronauts with God or the HS and is this not a credible
> > story?
> >
> > Walt
> >
> >
> > Jim Eisele wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Walter. I've only read the the first few words of your post. But
> > you're
> > > now my best e-mail friend!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -Jim
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Walter Hicks [mailto:wallyshoes@mindspring.com]
> > > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 4:55 PM
> > > To: Jim Eisele
> > > Cc: phseely@aol.com; asa@calvin.edu
> > > Subject: Re: Genesis One and Concordism (was a lot of other things
> > > previously)
> > >
> > > Hi Jim,
> > >
> > > So that you will not feel 100% alone, I have always thought of Genesis
> > > One as amazingly close to what current science has to say. I don't
> > > consider it to be a science textbook, but the general structure is
> > > something that strikes me as something quite unexpected from a culture
> > > thousands of years old. I may be wrong but I think that other cultures
> > > were far removed from anything like this and had rather bizarre outlooks
> > > by modern standards. In fact, as recently as the fifties (when I was in
> > > college), The big bang was ridiculed as something that was adopted only
> > > by non atheists who believed in "a beginning" to the universe. When the
> > > background radiation was discovered, Jastro(?) noted that when
> > > astronomers climbed to the top of mountain of discovery, they found it
> > > inhabited by philosophers who had been there for thousands of years. (or
> > > something like that).
> > >
> > > I have always taken Genesis One to indicate some degree of "insider
> > > knowledge". They often jump my bones for that attitude.
> > >
> > > I may not be correct, but at least I am company.
> > >
> > > Walt
> > >
> > > Jim Eisele wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Paul. In Gen 1:1 and concordism (was Apology) you wrote
> > > >
> > > > >Preach God as a Father caring enough to speak to his little children
> in
> > > > terms of their pre-understanding.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for that remark. It fits beautifully.
> > > >
> > > > I wanted to at least respond to that much. We may disagree about
> > Genesis
> > > > One, but I have no argument with that.
> > > >
> > > > As far as your comments about Genesis One, I haven't had time to fully
> > > > review them yet.
> > > > One quick thought, though.
> > > >
> > > > You wrote
> > > >
> > > > >Gen 1:1 "God created the heavens and the earth." is taken by most
> > > scholars
> > > > >today as either an introductory title or summary covering the entire
> > > > creation
> > > > >story down to 2:4
> > > >
> > > > Most, perhaps, but not all. And have scholars ever been wrong before?
> > I
> > > > haven't studied all the work of all the scholars. But could "God
> > created
> > > > the heavens and the earth" simply mean that God created the heavens
> and
> > > the
> > > > earth? I don't want to disrespect scholarship, I just want to debate
> > that
> > > > notion.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for taking the time to respond. I'm starting to realize that
> we
> > > have
> > > > more in common than I thought. -Jim
> > >
> > > --
> > > ===================================
> > > Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
> > >
> > > In any consistent theory, there must
> > > exist true but not provable statements.
> > > (Godel's Theorem)
> > >
> > > You can only find the truth with logic
> > > If you have already found the truth
> > > without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
> > > ===================================
> >
> > --
> > ===================================
> > Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
> >
> > In any consistent theory, there must
> > exist true but not provable statements.
> > (Godel's Theorem)
> >
> > You can only find the truth with logic
> > If you have already found the truth
> > without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
> > ===================================
> >
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 16 2002 - 18:12:48 EST