A
Arnold Philips
Guest
- Thread starter
- #21
I think it has more to do with Biblical infallibility. Like rezn said earlier, it's a house of cards. They simply can't imagine a world where the Bible might be mistaken, or might contradict itself, or might be vague in an area or two. This doesn't say as much about the Bible than about the radical insecurity of those who endorse its infallibility.
They, for the life of them, can't understand that the Bible can be scientifically wrong about creation, yet still be true theologically. The complaint I often hear is, "Well, if we can't trust the Bible about creation, then we might as well throw the whole thing away!" And, of course, this is patently ludicrous for various reasons.
They've built their whole lives and understanding around the idea that the Bible is infallible, and that it's especially infallible regarding creation. If this cornerstone is taken out, it's not as much a blow to their worldview, but a blow to their being. You aren't telling them, "What you believe is wrong," but "What you ARE is wrong." I think if we recognize this, then a lot of malicious banter and misunderstandings can be done away with.
They, for the life of them, can't understand that the Bible can be scientifically wrong about creation, yet still be true theologically. The complaint I often hear is, "Well, if we can't trust the Bible about creation, then we might as well throw the whole thing away!" And, of course, this is patently ludicrous for various reasons.
They've built their whole lives and understanding around the idea that the Bible is infallible, and that it's especially infallible regarding creation. If this cornerstone is taken out, it's not as much a blow to their worldview, but a blow to their being. You aren't telling them, "What you believe is wrong," but "What you ARE is wrong." I think if we recognize this, then a lot of malicious banter and misunderstandings can be done away with.