Friday, May 5, 2023

An Unexpected Turn

Creation vs. Evolution: Is It Christianity at All? · New blog on the kid: "Inspiring Philosophy" pretends to trace YEC to Ellen White ·Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Dr Joel Edmund Anderson - a Fraud or a Dupe? · Magisterium and Polygenism · An Unexpected Turn

I think I'll skip
the final 15 minutes for now.

Pretending St. Paul did not affirm the historicity of Eve, or Our Lord of Adam and Eve, Noah and the Flood, or St. Peter of Noah and the Flood, is like saying St. Irenaeus believed in ASCII code for Apoc. 13.

I think St. John had seen computers and ASCII, but I do not believe all that's to be finally revealed only when prophecy is fulfilled was culturally present to the early Church. Greek gematria was a standin, they could express the code needed to have numeric values for all letters, not just some of them (exeunt Roman Numerals), and to have a known spelling (exit Hebrew gematria).

But while ASCII is a 20th C. invention, which is useful, I'm using it right now, "Genesis 1 to 11 is mythology and therefore not history" is a 20th C. (19th to 21st C.) ideology, and useless. It was not only not present to 1st C. audiences, it should not be there in us either.

Spank Duncan 111
Wow Hans, I'm impressed with how many words you can type.
Not sure what your point is though.
Are you a Hamm Fan?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@Spank Duncan 111 If you didn't arrive to a point, maybe I'm less impressed with how many words you can read.

Or you didn't like the way the point was looking?

I'm discussing what kind of modern discoveries or inventions one can read into God's and the hagiographer's intention, even if it would have been over the head of the original audience. An invention that may be to the point, yes. A discovery that is not a legitimate discovery, no.

Spank Duncan 111
@Hans-Georg Lundahl I was referring to the plethora of posts you submitted to the thread. And no, I did not read every word of every post. Your knowledge and opinions of the subject might better be represented in book form.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@Spank Duncan 111 I am very much not against a republication in book form.

One involving this dialogue between us would arguably need your permission as well as mine ...

I also write essays that can stand alone without reference to a video, those are, probably, still most of my blog posts.

Spank Duncan 111
@Hans-Georg Lundahl
There's nothing I've shared I would deem worthy of publication except as a YouTube post. Feel free to use it however you like.
Have you already expressed these comments in book form?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@Spank Duncan 111 I have made home made booklets, printed on xerox, but mainly essay format. Essay collection.

Spank Duncan 111
Two questions Hans. Do you believe the bible is the word of God and do you believe Ken Hamm is on the right track with his interpretation of the bible?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@Spank Duncan 111 I believe all of the 73 books are the word of God.

I believe when it comes to justification, Ken Ham is less objectionable than some Calvinists, and when it comes to Genesis 1 to 11, he's wrong in minor detail, but correct in the main lines.

Spank Duncan 111
@Hans-Georg Lundahl thank you Hans for your succinct prompt reply.
What makes you think God exists?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@Spank Duncan 111 1) Only God could turn the Universe around us each day.
2) God could have united mind and body in the way we see ourselves, and Materialism being true definitely couldn't have produced mind.
3) God did miracles throughout history, and some of them take, not just superhuman power, but literally omnipotence, like raising of dead.

Please note:
I am NOT against a republication in book form. I can, for now be contacted at

No comments: