"Why did God deem some acts moral and others immoral? If he had no reason but divine whim, why should we take his commandments seriously? If he did have reasons, then why not appeal to those reasons directly?"
This may be a little off subject but, Why is scripture considered relevant today?
As I understand it there were three test used to determine if a book was suitable for inclusion into the New Testament cannon (1 Written by an apostle or endorsed by and Apostle (2 Accepted by the early church as holy scripture and (3 did not contradict what was already known to be sacred scripture.
Scholars today don't believe Matthew was written by Matthew, Mark by Mark, Luke by Luke and John by John. That being the case why are they still included.... tradition? It was partially the science of linguistics and lexicography that unveiled this. This is a topic I would be interested in you guys expounding on.
In the comments section of the web page, Harold Katcher wrote: "The evolution seen in nature would therefore be the most direct manifestation of God, and that is what should be studied as evidence of His will; actions speak louder than words, especially words from mere human beings."
I wonder if 'theistic evolutionists' ever really stop to ponder the ramifications of a statement such as this. What kind of a god are these people describing when they postulate that the god they worship, set up the process of random mutation and natural selection? Evolution by natural selection is a process which causes the excruciating suffering and death of countless millions of sentient creatures. What kind of evil monster would intentionally set up such a system, and how could anyone bring themselves to worship such a being?
5 comments:
I liked this by Pinker:
"Why did God deem some acts moral and others immoral? If he had no reason but divine whim, why should we take his commandments seriously? If he did have reasons, then why not appeal to those reasons directly?"
These debates, and indeed this entire concept, is genius. Stupid work keeps getting in the way of my reading...
What a great collection of essays!
Thanks John & Guy for the link.
-evan
This may be a little off subject but, Why is scripture considered relevant today?
As I understand it there were three test used to determine if a book was suitable for inclusion into the New Testament cannon (1 Written by an apostle or endorsed by and Apostle (2 Accepted by the early church as holy scripture and (3 did not contradict what was already known to be sacred scripture.
Scholars today don't believe Matthew was written by Matthew, Mark by Mark, Luke by Luke and John by John. That being the case why are they still included.... tradition? It was partially the science of linguistics and lexicography that unveiled this. This is a topic I would be interested in you guys expounding on.
In the comments section of the web page, Harold Katcher wrote:
"The evolution seen in nature would therefore be the most direct manifestation of God, and that is what should be studied as evidence of His will; actions speak louder than words, especially words from mere human beings."
I wonder if 'theistic evolutionists' ever really stop to ponder the ramifications of a statement such as this.
What kind of a god are these people describing when they postulate that the god they worship, set up the process of random mutation and natural selection?
Evolution by natural selection is a process which causes the excruciating suffering and death of countless millions of sentient creatures. What kind of evil monster would intentionally set up such a system, and how could anyone bring themselves to worship such a being?
Post a Comment