I am not going to reply to these individually because I was addressing an over-arching theme and honestly, half of your responses are Greek to me. I have no idea what you believe or don’t believe. I never called anyone a liar so I think your beef is with someone else. The Chicago Statement is incompatible with science if that’s the starting point. My interest is in helping uneducated Christians avoid harrowing deaths and this seems to be a site where influential people might be. Death by Covid is a horrible harrowing death. May both our parents be vaccinated.
Goddess bless.
Well your response is certainly incoherent to me. I don’t know where you are getting an accusation against you of calling someone a liar. I never heard of any young earth creationist (YEC) who would argue that the Bible is only fiction. So I cannot imagine you claiming to be one.
I don’t know why you are harping on about some Chicago statement… (of Biblical inerrancy?). WHO here has advocated Biblical inerrancy?
I think YOUR beef is with someone else.
Then what are you doing HERE? Are you suggesting we are uneducated Christians. What is your education? I have two masters degrees, how about you?
Influential with WHO? Creationists? No. antivaxers? I don’t think so.
Frankly if this is what your initial post is about then it is rather off-topic and you should have started a different thread. Why didn’t you post in one of the threads about covid vaccines. There are many of them.
No, he was venting at evangelicalism in frustration. But he did use this topic as a springboard to do so. This issue ultimately is a topic of discussion for concordant readings of scripture. Doesn’t seem to matters at all for those who believe in divine accommodation.
Vinnie
Then you are not reading sufficiently or for comprehension. There are many here constantly applying scientific method. My humble self especially. I’ve been criticized by an otherwise excellently intellectually sound moderator for citing Kierkegaard months ago.
I call BS!
Please look up the following people:
John Polkinghorne KBE
Francis Collins
Ken Miller
Brother Guy J. Consolmagno, SJ
Denis Lamoureux
Karl Giberson
Katharine Hayhoe
The Rev. Pamela Conrad
Arthur Peacocke
Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori
None is as intellectually honest as Kierkegaard until proven otherwise. Sir John for a start. Sat at his feet as I have. Peacocke is fine post-hoc. That’s the trouble. There is no warrant for moving beyond pre-hoc. But desire met in Paul’s Jesus.
I just said that I am new and that I have re-evaluated related to that. The Young World and the Old World creation posts seem mostly contrived but on other topics I am impressed.
Anyone who mentions Kierkegaard has like me, actually struggled with all of this and not just accepted these that seem mythological as true. You are the only other Christian 'kept me that I have either seen reference my hero, Soren.
Regards
Seemingly mythological writings…
Anyone who mentions Kierkegaard has like me, actually struggled with all of this and not just accepted these that seem mythological as true.
I am always happy to mention Kierkegaard, though I am more a fan of Albert Camus… bit more readable. I am frankly a scientist, existentialist, and Christian, in that order. Science is my first filter on reality but I have never seen anything in science to support naturalism (equating science with reality itself). Nevertheless what is compatible with science is part of my definition of rationality. Existentialism is the second filter and the one which actually made theism accessible to me.
But while my specialty in science is physics, I was raised on psychology. And one of the things psychology has to teach us is about how memory works – kind of like mythology frankly.
Welcome. I’m glad to start out on your good side, speaking of S.K.:
In the same vein: Proof would negate love: If God bowled us over with evidence, it would negate love. Imagine if God reveals Himself to the point that everyone “has to” believe in Him (if it would be possible). The problem with such a scenario is that there would be no love relationship with Him, it would be forced relationship. The philosopher Soren Kierkegaard imagined a king who loved a humble maiden. He had all the power to force her to come to his palace, marry him and be crowned the q…
(There is objective evidence, however, discussed elsewhere in various places. Here’s one of the later ones.)
I read about Kierkegaard’s engagement to Regine Olsen. It is was a difficult story to read. Most time I just wanted to yell at him to get over himself. It is only in an afterthought that I realized how precarious so many things in life can be, and I simply cannot rule out the possibility that the marriage could have been a complete disaster for both of them. Love is so absolute that saying no to love seems must always be a mistake. But reality intrudes with many scary possibilities which we do not know how we can avoid. And is not the worst of possibilities one where love, no matter how real it is, turns sour to hatred and despair. It is one of the things on which we theists often look to God for some hope for guidance.
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.