Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Sep 2002 20:19:30 -0400
From:      Lawrence Sica <lomifeh@earthlink.net>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Cc:        "Neal E. Westfall" <nwestfal@directvinternet.com>, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>, Joshua Lee <yid@softhome.net>, dave@jetcafe.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Why did evolution fail?
Message-ID:  <4E5806F4-C5E5-11D6-9A0C-000393A335A2@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <3D7FC334.396A9F12@mindspring.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Wednesday, September 11, 2002, at 06:27  PM, Terry Lambert wrote:

> "Neal E. Westfall" wrote:
>>> Well, if you want, we can start at the very, very beginning,
>>> and work out the entire basis for a rationalist world view.
>>> We can start with "light bulbs work".
>>
>> Actually you can't start there.  The premise that "light bulbs work"
>> is dependent on the uniformity of nature, for which you have yet to
>> provide a justification.
>
> I justify it by the fact that light bulbs are *observed* to work.
>
>
>>> There are a number of scriptures which are and aren't considered
>>> part of "The Bible"; the inclusion and exclusion are rather
>>> arbitrary and political, as well.
>>
>> Proof, please.  What you seem to be missing is that on a theistic
>> worldview, God is able to ensure that the totality of what He wishes
>> to reveal, nothing more, nothing less, gets into the canon.  If God
>> is providentially in control of all things, he is able to ensure
>> that the word He wishes to communicate gets so communicated.  
>> Political
>> considerations are irrelevant.
>
> So which is the *true* canon, and *why*?  The dead sea scrolls,
> of which th Bible is a translation, are not all of the dead sea
> scrolls there were, they were only some of them.
>
> Is the true canon the dead sea scrolls?  Or is it the King James
> translation into English of the Bible?
>

The Roman Catholic church at one point decided to put together an 
"official" bible,  this was begun during the First Nicene Council, the 
process was called the canonization of the bible.  At the time there 
were hundreds of gospels and assorted "books of the bible".  The most 
common form of the New Testament was put together in like 367 AD, by I 
forget who.  Politics was a role in this.  Do you know aboutthe 
controversial "Gospel of St. Thomas"?  Do you know of any of his 
writings?

--Larry


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E5806F4-C5E5-11D6-9A0C-000393A335A2>