From: John Burgeson (burgythree@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Jan 28 2003 - 12:08:35 EST
>>I see the smallest seed as an example of error introduced by
>>misinterpretation.
The intent of the statement is that a proverbially tiny seed grows into one
of
the biggest familiar garden plants. To claim that the statement is
incorrect
requires the initial misinterpretation. >>
I understand. I see your position to be one of special pleading of course. I
have no problems with assuming that Jesus held the common knowledge of his
times. But some folks do have a problem with that.
John W. Burgeson (Burgy)
www.burgy.50megs.com
>From: "bivalve" <bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com>
>Reply-To: <bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com>
>To: <asa@calvin.edu>
>Subject: Re: BIBLE/ORIGINS: seeking feedback
>Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:56:21 -0500
>
>I see the smallest seed as an example of error introduced by
>misinterpretation. The intent of the statement is that a proverbially tiny
>seed grows into one of the biggest familiar garden plants. To claim that
>the statement is incorrect requires the initial misinterpretation.
>
> Dr. David Campbell
> Old Seashells
> University of Alabama
> Biodiversity & Systematics
> Dept. Biological Sciences
> Box 870345
> Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0345 USA
> bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
>
>That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted
>Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at
>Droitgate Spa
>
>---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
>From: Jan de Koning <jan@dekoning.ca>
>Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 10:17:01 -0500
>
> >At 09:58 AM 25/01/2003 -0700, John Burgeson wrote about inerrancy. It
> >strikes me that in most of these discussions people forget that God (in
>the
> >Bible) in a language they understood. In the first place our concept of
> >"truth" is different from what is often called "truth" in the Bible, but
> >more importantly, at the time the Bible was inscripturated people had
> >another culture, another language, another way of living, etc.. To
>expect
> >that what we call "truth" in scientific sense (if there is unity on that)
> >and in biblical sense is the same, does not take into account the
> >differences when we talk about issues, is in my opinion really
> >un-scientific. Many people who take the Bible to be God's "inerrant"
>Word,
> >take into account the culture, language etc. of the people God used when
> >the Bible was first written. It does not make any sense that God would
> >talk to the Israelites in 21st century scientific language.
> >
> >I do believe that the Bible is God's Word, and that studying it life long
> >does not clarify all difficulties we find in translating, copying,
> >understanding etc., but if we take ourselves as the judge of what is
> >acceptable in the Bible we are on a dangerous road.
> >
> >Jan de Koning
> >
> >
>
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 28 2003 - 12:11:54 EST