<<Jim, it is not that I miss that aspect of Scripture. It is that I reject it
as the most useful approach. The most useful approach to me is that there is
absolute historical proof of the events in the Bible, like having the
execution order for Jesus, secular accounts of the Star of Bethlehem. The
expense accounts of the Wisemen and the documentation of Herod's order to
kill the children. This would make those events historically verified. One
of the problems I see with your approach is that it removes the Bible
from verifiability. >>
Which says to me that he is missing current biblical scholarship, the points
I've been making, and using a broad brush that fails to distinguish the
biblical literature. For example, equating the execution order for Jesus
(which I haven't been talking about) with, say, all other aspects of
scripture.
You reject the views of virtually all current scholars, but haven't yet read
them (you admit). I'm not sure this is the scientific or theological method at
its best.
Because of this, you ask questions such as the following:
<<So, how can the statement "In the beginning God created the heavens and the
earth," be both TRUE and NON-HISTORICAL at the same time? It seems to me
that if the statement is TRUE, it MUST also be HISTORICAL !!!>>
I don't think you'd ask this if you were up on the current scholarship,
especially Bloesch. I can do no more than keep referring you back there.
<< Do you think we will spend time in heaven arguing these issues? Or is that
our punishment in the other place? :-)>>
Maybe this is purgatory and we don't know it yet!
Jim