[asa] RE: ICR vs. Francis Collins

I recall Eberhard Hopf, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eberhard_Hopf and http://www.gap-system.org/~history/Mathematicians/Hopf_Eberhard.html , who introduced me to the notion of "fixed point theorems." I use the concept of fixed point often as an undeniable truth to be emphasized. I ask, what would Collins consider fixed points in the Bible, that is, what must be true otherwise the Bible is just a book with little content and truth? BTW, I audited on five semesters of Hopf's math courses in graduate school at Indiana University-three semesters of differential equation and two of functional analysis. Math majors used to borrow my notes to study for exams.

Moorad

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Dehler, Bernie
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 2:45 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: [asa] RE: ICR vs. Francis Collins

ICR: "But quite troubling is Collins' public and proud disbelief in the historicity of the Bible, the existence of Adam and Eve, the event of the Fall, and many more fundamental doctrines of God's Word"

So these are apparently (from ICR's viewpoint) 'fundamental doctrines of God's Word:'

1. "historicity of the Bible" (What does this mean? It means that the geneologies in the bible are accurate, such as Adam in the geneologies? If it means something else- what specifically?)
2. "the existence of Adam and Eve" (might be the same as #1 above)
3. "the event of the fall" (same related issue)

Does "God's Word" really lay out these doctrines, or is it 'theology' interpreted from the bible? A 'fundamental' error here is assuming that the Bible teaches theology, rather than understanding that theology is derived from interpreting the bible. Once they understand that the bible is interpreted, then hermeneutics can be discussed. Until then, they assume their hermeneutic is the only hermeneutic.

...Bernie

________________________________
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Dehler, Bernie
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 9:02 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: [asa] ICR vs. Francis Collins

This just in from ICR- Institute for Creation Research:

http://www.icr.org/article/4821/

Excerpt:
Should we conclude that Dr. Francis Collins is not a "born again" Christian as described in the Bible? He appears to be genuine and sincere in his belief that Jesus Christ is his personal Savior. But quite troubling is Collins' public and proud disbelief in the historicity of the Bible, the existence of Adam and Eve, the event of the Fall, and many more fundamental doctrines of God's Word--leading one to conclude that even if he is a Christian, his self-selective beliefs are terribly resistant to God's truth, revealing his dangerously poor view of the power of God. Like the Sadducees, Collins errs by "not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God" (Matthew 22:29<http://www.icr.org/bible/Matthew/22/29>).

...

Is Dr. Collins skilled to lead the programs of the NIH? Absolutely. Is he qualified to teach the Bible? Not a chance. There are "more legitimate evangelical" Bible teachers who are "genuine authorities" in the Bible.

I wonder how they could approach Denis Lamoureux since he is also a similar TE, but has a doctorate in theology. Is Denis qualified to teach the bible, supposedly as Ken Ham is? (I don't think Ken Ham even has a theology degree.)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Sep 1 15:19:24 2009