Comment on The Reptile King by Wesley Kime.
“Ron,” your allegation, as whimsical and stylized as it is, raises yet again the whole, very tired, never seriously asked question of why people, anybody, leave this particular church. Surely it cannot but be recognized, but never is, that the question is open and multifaceted, and answers must include theistic evolutionary hermeneutically haughty, if whimsical, poses as well as legalistic fundamentalist attitudes, especially of ornery babies. Anyway, some of us (I am a distant relative of the accused) are more confirmed in the church than ever precisely as a result of not only Dr. Pitman’s attitude, and that of this site, but the facts and evidence he perseveres in presenting. Thank you for the excuse for inserting this.
Wesley Kime Also Commented
The Reptile King
@Professor Kent: â€œSalvation SCIENCE?â€ Hmmmmâ€¦..seems an after-market thingamajig (â€œscienceâ€) got snucked in, like you find a Lada Gaga coupon in your Walmart sack along with the cat litter you bought. So howâ€™s â€œsalvation scienceâ€ different from plain old tent-meeting baptismal â€œSalvationâ€? About like â€œChristian Scienceâ€ is different from â€œChristianâ€?
By the way â€“ as our bonus Gaga coupon for you — howâ€™s â€œhermeneutical criticismâ€ different from regular hermeneutics, already plenty whimsically and casuistically (ergo, er, scientifically) handy?
But seriously, Iâ€™m worried: do we really want to climb into another can of worms? Goodness! the trouble weâ€™ve already had with creation SCIENCE!
The Reptile King
Professor: “I invite anyone to point out to me any post written by me that you think is inconsistent with my stated beliefs.”
Inconsistencies? As the poetess would put it, Let me count the ways. No, let IBM’s supercomputer count them. It just crashed! Took the free world’s power grid with it!
Thatâ€™s bad, to analytically criticize?
But isnâ€™t hermeneutics nothing if not criticism? Higher-historical-haute-grammatical-phrenological-philosophical-parochial-medieval/pop-empiric-imperial criticism? The kind that is so exquisitely critical and historical and grammatical that it decides whether, or what part of, the Bible is myth or allegory or otherwise dismissible, or how seriously taken, that kind?
And suddenly EducaTruth and theistic evolution areâ€¦bedfellows?
And ergo hermeneutic kinetics uber alles?
Recent Comments by Wesley Kime
Dr. Walter Veith and the anti-vaccine arguments of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche
Informative and stimulating, but proceeding into more confusion. A veteran of Moderna vaccinations, I trust, hope, they are effective, at least until otherwise. The whole business, being part of End Times, is in the hands of God, not humans expert and as degreed as they may be.
Brilliant and Beautiful, but Wrong
Brilliant, beautiful, and so right! Speaking of your presentation at LLU recently. Great to see you and your family (especially my namesake, Wes. God bless! WK
Evolution from Space?
Hats off yet again to Sean for pursuing this topic as a scientist should, no nonsense, and in it’s proper setting — as a revival of one of the ancient ideas recently upgraded as a desperate alternative to the increasingly compelling intelligent design data. I had occasion to review panspermia a few years ago and as is my wont I found it more amusing than scientific. If you would like what was intended to be a satirical response to panspermia and other related curiosities you could check out: http://www.iessaythere.com/black-hole-humor.html
Meantime, Sean’s article is of far more cogent worth.
The Sabbath and the Covenants (Old vs. New)
As he has done on this site many times, Sean in his line-by-line-item response to C. White (not EG or EB) has, to my mind, clearly enunciated the issue and resolution.
When all the hermeneutics, quoting, and arguing and inordinately judgmental riposte are over, it comes down, as I understand it, to two things: 1) Whether the 7th day Sabbath (whether enunciated in the famous 10 commandments or otherwise) is still valid, and 2) Does the grace obtained by the vicarious sacrifice by the shedding of Christ’s blood or other divine process too deep for us to understand in this life, cover every sin automatically and without ado, altogether passively on our part, or is it only on condition that we first totally and deeply accept it? Other details always hassled forever are distractions.
I accept that I must accept it, wholly, actively, even with agony, with my whole being.