Re: Does the Bible teach a flat earth?

From: Jim Eisele (jeisele@starpower.net)
Date: Fri Dec 27 2002 - 11:31:53 EST

  • Next message: Michael Roberts: "Re: A Bit of Christmas Levity"

    John wrote

    >>Jim Wrote: "If Christianity is to survive, it is going to have to accept
    the
    >>Bible as a human document. I don't know how successful Christians will be
    >>with that approach, but its the only hope that they have."

    >In this, Jim, you appear to be in substantial agreement with the process
    >theologians Peacocke, Borg, Spong and Griffin. The latest books from the
    >first and last of these four Christians were reviewed by me both in
    >PERSPECTIVES and in an expanded article on Metanexus; copies are on my web
    >site.

    >I've read much of both Spong and Borg (not reviewed them however). Although
    >I personally don't agree with much of their theology, I see theirs as a
    >valid Christian worldview. The best book by Borg I have is the one he
    >co-wrote with a conservative (orthodox) Christian as a back and forth
    debate
    >over these issues.

    >I recommend any and all of these authors to you.

    I think that I mentioned in a previous post how odd it is to
    now be more "liberal" than the most liberal ASAer. One consequence
    is that I now side with Christian liberals against Biblical inerrantists.
    In that sense, I respect all honest scholarship. Oh well, I find the
    number of my "postable" thoughts for this list dwindling. If faith
    "feels good, do it" :-) The real societal problems are the conservative
    inerrantists (predominantly YECs).

    Peace,
    Jim

    >From: "Jim Eisele" <jeisele@starpower.net>
    >To: "Peter Ruest" <pruest@dplanet.ch>
    >CC: <asa@calvin.edu>
    >Subject: Re: Does the Bible teach a flat earth?
    >Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:48:37 -0000
    >
    >Peter writes
    >
    > >The Bible has to use the (flexible) language of the day, in a way
    > >compatible with God's intentions for _all_ of subsequent history.
    >
    >Peter, first I would like to commend you on your valiant effort to
    >reconcile Gen 1 with the Bible. In an age when Christians still
    >believe the earth is 6K old, your approach is noble.
    >
    >For the sake of Christianity, you may wish to cease making statements
    >like this, however. For the purposes of this list, I will only say
    >this (althought there are weightier problems with this angle) - the
    >Bible is way too long. The Christian message is all men are sinners
    >and need Christ to pay for their sins. Any perceived falsehood in
    >the Bible allows non-Christians to ignore its message (in Christian
    >terms, not get convicted of sin). This represents a contradiction.
    >God is supposed to be convicting non-Christians of sin, but because
    >of the falsehoods (I am simply tired of Christians explaining
    >inaccuracies as "figurative speech) they are turning their backs.
    >
    >If Christianity is to survive, it is going to have to accept the Bible
    >as a human document. I don't know how successful Christians will be
    >with that approach, but its the only hope that they have.
    >
    >Jim

    _________________________________________________________________
    STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 3 months FREE*.
    http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=747
    4&SU=
    http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_stopmorespa
    m_3mf

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Dec 27 2002 - 19:45:54 EST