From: bivalve (bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com)
Date: Fri Aug 15 2003 - 11:51:35 EDT
>(b) Challenging the presupposition that there is such a thing as THE correct and authoritative biblical teaching regarding the formational history of the Creation or the character of divine creative action and accepting the difficult task of developing a perspective, not by appeal to an ancient canon declared to represent divine authority, but by a rational examination of a diversity of relevant considerations -- empirical, theological, philosophical, historical -- all recognized as the products of thoroughly human efforts to make sense of the grand human experience.<
>I suggest that (a) has been adequately tried, and has failed. I am personally inclined to dig deeper and follow an approach more like (b).<
(b) has been tried, and failed, too (see, e.g., Ecclesiastes). There is also some self-contradiction, in that (b) is itself an interpretation of Biblical teaching which claims to be the correct one. Likewise, the appeal to rational examination must be tempered by the recognition that it, too, is a thoroughly human effort. Much depends on individual taste. As for me, a comparison of the Biblical portrayal of God with that of process theology reminds me of comparison between a good brie or cheddar versus pasteurized processed cheese food. This reflects my preferences and philosophical presuppositions about what God ought to be like, which obviously vary from person to person, but this does not prove that no correct view of God exists.
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Aug 15 2003 - 11:51:53 EDT