cfiaime (01/28/83)
In a recent article on the net, the question was raised as to why some of us use the Bible to support our belief and discussions about God. This particular discussion suggested that instead of utilizing the Bible, we utilize original thought. The article was written as a flame, but this reply is meant as my opinion, an is in no way a flame. First, to deny the Christian the use of the Bible as a source for arguments or discussion is somewhat akin to discussing evolution but not being able to use Darwin. Remember, the Bible is the foundation of our faith, the final authority as to all matters religious. Certainly, a Christian should read other commentaries on the Bible. A studied Christian will be able to quote Luther, Calvin and John-Paul II, if not in exact wordings, then in concept. Second, each person must make up his or her mind as to the validity of the Bible. To be a Christian means to accept Christ as shown in the Bible. There is no magic formula which says that a person stops thinking after accepting the salvation which is offered by God through Christ. Indeed, the Christian must continue to examine the very faith which he/she professes. I have a copy of the New Testament at my desk, not that I am going to argue religion based only on the Bible, but that the Bible is a constant source of strength, information and comfort. In reading the Bible, I can reflect on the wonderful message of salvation, and better accept myself for what I am. Jeff Williams BTL - Indian Hill
lmg (01/28/83)
"First, to deny the Christian the use of the Bible as a source for arguments or discussion is somewhat akin to discussing evolution but not being able to use Darwin. Remember, the Bible is the foundation of our faith, the final authority as to all matters religious." ********** I'm afraid the situation is not at all comparable. Evolution can be thoroughly discussed without any reference to Darwin at all. Darwin's work is in no way a "Bible" or "final authority" for evolutionary theory. It is just another reference work on the subject, albeit a very famous work and one of the earliest. The ultimate test of the validity of any statements about evolution (or any other subject) is not whether or not it agrees with what Darwin (or whomever) wrote, but whether or not observation and experiment show it to be correct. The problem with religious discussions is that observational and experimental tests tend to produce negative results, which can't prove much of anything. Larry Geary
bcw (01/29/83)
From: Bruce C. Wright @ Duke University Re: Use of the Bible It probably wouldn't matter too much for a biologist to not refer to Darwin in disputes about evolution; it would be fairly easy to refer to others who would have the same amount of authority (even amoung Darwin's contemporaries, Wallace and Huxley would do just about as well as Darwin). There is quite a difference - the Bible claims to be in some way *unique*, and hence enjoys a special status which no scientist, living or dead, would enjoy in such a dispute. I think that it was *this* special appeal to authority which was objected to, not at all like an appeal (for example) to a scientist who is probably only considered one of thousands. Probably a more appropriate analogy would be to restrict a Communist (of any stripe) engaging in a debate to refrain from any references to Marx; though many Communists look suspiciously like members of a secular religion and not like scientists or humanists ... Bruce C. Wright @ Duke University
sher (01/30/83)
There seems to be some confusion about just what is claimed in the Bible. In my experience, I have never heard a claim that the Bible is the sole word of God, merely that it is the word of God. Of course I have not seen all the claims made by theologians and religious people and might have forgotten, so is it or isn't it. Does anyone out there come from a church or other religious organization that claims the Bible (or any other text) is the sole unique word of God? -David Sher (oftimes AI project)