From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (dfsiemensjr@juno.com)
Date: Mon Jun 02 2003 - 14:13:10 EDT
Debbie,
I suppose that Paul walked away and did not confront Peter (Galatians
2:11-21; cf. Acts 15:2), never had harsh words with Barnabas (Acts
15:39), and wouldn't write anything like Galatians 5:12. (Get a proper
translation for this. AV bowdlerized it two centuries before Thomas
Bowdler published.)
Dave
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003 19:57:52 -0500 "Debbie Mann"
<deborahjmann@InsightBB.com> writes:
> Thew correlation between Jesus chastising those profiteering on
> religion and
> someone getting off on tangents (assuming you are right which could
> very
> well be an example of ass u me) is slight at best. It seems that if
> two
> people are enjoying a conversation about something which may or may
> not have
> value, then the proper response for anyone who finds it silly or
> boring is
> to ask that the topic heading be appropriate and then delete those
> messages.
> Chastising someone for 'weird' ideas seems inappropriate.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. [mailto:dfsiemensjr@juno.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 1:50 PM
> To: iain.strachan.asa@ntlworld.com
> Cc: deborahjmann@insightbb.com; asa@lists.calvin.edu;
> michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk
> Subject: Re: The forgotten verses
>
>
>
> On Sat, 31 May 2003 19:19:49 +0100 "Iain Strachan"
> <iain.strachan.asa@ntlworld.com> writes:
> > Debbie writes a lot of sense here; it is the closing out of love
> > that
> > concerns me, particularly in the bitterness and sarcasm with
> which
> > Vernon's
> > observations are received.
> >
> > I for one don't insist you have to believe all that or agree on
> all
> > the
> > details to be a Christian. But when Michael writes something
> like:
> >
> >
> > > I get fed up with the superspirituality and offensiveness of
> > people like
> > you
> > > who assume that those who dont support your silly myths of
> > numerology and
> > > YEC have rejected the Bible.
> > >
> >
> > .. then I seriously wonder how in the world you can call someone
> > "offensive"
> > and then reply by being equally offensive yourself. Michael has
> > frequently
> > on the list stated that he does not understand the maths behind
> > Vernon's
> > theories. Therefore surely that position of ignorance does not
> > qualify him
> > to state that the "numerology" is a "silly myth", and even if he
> > was
> > qualified to suggest it was all wrong, then a reasoned argument is
> > far more
> > persuasive than using perjorative language like that.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > I have tried to answer your questions but you simply have a
> > closed mind
> > and
> > > heart
> > >
> >
> > .. and the same is true for you, I'm afraid; I've repeatedly
> tried
> > to reason
> > with you that this is something that it's reasonable to look
> into;
> > that it's
> > part of my own personal journey etc. I have never suggested that
> > you should
> > go along with it or that it or anything else was necessary for
> your
> > salvation. Not the slightest acknowledgement have I received
> from
> > you on
> > this, nor any convincing argument why I should not pursue this,
> or
> > indeed
> > seek to discuss it with a group of intelligent scientifically
> > oriented
> > fellow Christians. But everytime the subject comes up, when
> there
> > are
> > individuals on the group who have responded in an intelligent
> manner
> > that
> > aids discussion, we don't get very far before you come out with
> one
> > of your
> > nasty sarcastic statements, like the triangular olive leaves.
> I've
> > tried
> > very hard not to close out the love aspect here, but it's all I
> can
> > do at
> > the moment to close out the rising anger.
> >
> > Iain
> >
> >
> Iain,
> How many sermons have you heard preached on Matthew 23? Is this
> because
> Jesus was wrong, or because we are too "nice"? I contend that we
> have
> changed _agape_ from a rational giving (see TDNT) to a sloppy
> sentimentality. The Golden Rule expresses its biblical essence as
> clearly
> as "Love your neighbor ..." Part of an honest concern is calling a
> shovel
> a shovel. This is not necessarily "nice" in an age that insists
> that
> every idea is equally deserving of a hearing and that no one is to
> be
> embarassed.
>
> Michael has, among other activities, checked the quotations
> presented in
> support of YEC ideas and found them gross misrepresentations of the
> research. He has solid grounds to call them lies. When the
> falsehoods
> have been repeated after the perpetrators have been notified of
> their
> error, he has grounds for denunciation as solid as those our Lord
> had in
> the sermon recorded in Matthew 23.
>
> As to the numerology, how does it clarify the message of scripture?
> How
> does counting letters make anyone a better follower of Christ? a
> better
> person whatever the standards? It seems rather to encourage pride
> like
> that of Gnostics and Kabbalists. For a specific instance, how does
> extracting an inexact value for pi from numerological data do more
> than
> the "inspired" value of 3 given in II Chronicles 4:2? Is either
> representative of an omniscient deity, who must know the
> transcendental
> nature of pi? I have to concur with Michael's judgment. As I see it,
> you
> are being suckered into wasting your time with numerological
> drivel.
>
> So, does Michael have grounds for being testy? Definitely. Could he
> be
> sweeter? Of course. Could Jesus have gentled his denunciation of
> the
> scribes and Pharisees, and not whipped the dealers and
> money-changers out
> of the Temple? Surely. Should Christ and Michael have approached
> matters
> differently? Hm-mm.
> Dave
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 02 2003 - 14:43:12 EDT