From: John Burgeson (burgythree@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Apr 29 2003 - 11:36:04 EDT
>>I think you are confounding accuracy and precision. Their knowledge seems
>>to be
accurate but limited. >>
I hate to say it, but I think you are (possibly -- <G>) right. Still -- it
is apparent (I think) that at least some of their knowledge is inaccurate. I
am sure they think of the Flood and creation in YEC terms.
But let's consider, instead of my mentally challenged friends, the very
intelligent people who hold forth at ICR. From our perspective, we see them
as inaccurate (theologically) when they insist a literal reading of Genesis
is a requirement to be a Christian. To that extent, at least, we say they
hold an inaccurate understanding of the divine. Yet I think none of us would
also see them as, therefore, not Christians in as good standing as any of
us.
>>Do you think it is OK if someone believes that gasing the Tokyo subway is
>>a
theologically good action? If not, you are holding some standard of
theological
accuracy. >>
Good point. I do not, obviously. SOME degree of accuracy seems to be
needful. But what that degree is I'm not prepared to measure.
The counterpart to that action that came to mind is the (apparent) commad of
God to commit genocide on the Amalikites -- including infants -- that
appears in I Sam 15. Do I think that was a "theologically good action?" If I
did (I don't), then why would I reject your example out of hand?
Burgy
www.burgy.50megs.com
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Apr 29 2003 - 11:36:43 EDT