There are times you've got to shake your head in amazement at what some more wooden-minded folk believe. And we're not necessarily talking about uneducated, backwoods types either. Simply place a reasonably intelligent, sincere and likeable person in a narrow and oppressive sect, and then give them a job and a salary to defend. Lo, wine is turned into hogwash, and impossibly silly things are exalted as dogma.The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod is, in my view anyway, a sect, despite looking a lot like a legitimate Lutheran body (like the ELCA).
And here's exhibit A. Paul McCain writing on the necessity of believing that Adam and Eve were literal people.
"I've been following debates/arguments/discussions/conversations about the historicity of Adam and Eve. For our Lord Christ, the fact of the creation of Adam and Eve by God, and their union to one another, ordained by God, is the very foundation of marriage and all human sexuality. Precisely because the Lord taught this, this has an enormous impact on how the Church and the faithful, should—no not should, that’s way too soft a word—absolutely must—affirm the historicity of Adam and Eve."Absolutely must. So there! And just look at the nice artwork Pastor McCain provides. What a fine Nordic Eve. In fact neither of these progenitors seems to have come "out of Africa". Fancy that.
In the event of inconsiderate facts clashing with received dogma - no matter how dopey - guess which wins hands down.
Sometimes those who shout the loudest or persist the longest are perceived as being the victors of a discussion or debate. Bottom line, is that each of us as individuals end up being our own arbiters as to what meets the standards for truth. As an example, I understand that scientists were able, this year, to debunk the theory of global warming, now renamed "climate change". Apparently the temperature of the earth's surface has not risen for the past 15 years. So, we will need a new, and fresh theory to explain why the majority of the earth's glaciers are melting, and retreating.
ReplyDeleteBB
The December 7 issue of New Scientist addresses the "climate slowdown" issue, and unfortunately the news is not good. See "The Heat is Still On", p.34-38.
Delete"A man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest". So said Simon and Garfunkel, and it certainly appears here. Bob, you appear to be getting your "scientific" information from Fox News. If you read the reports of reputable climate science experts instead, you'll get a much different answer - possibly one you don't want to hear.
DeleteI don't know of any reputable scientist who has stated what BB attests to. Where are you getting this, BB?
DeleteThat was the point, guys! Like the rest of you, I've been looking at the pictures of thousand year old forests suddenly coming into view, having become conspicuous as the glacier which covered them melted and advanced away, and listening to the concerns of people on small island nations who are fearful of an advancing ocean.
DeleteBut, this debunking thing, and fifteen years without temp rise is what is currently being shouted the loudest, on conservative talk radio and by industrialists and evangelicals. Supposedly the "study" came out of the UK. My point being, if this is factual, then why are the glaciers still beating an advanced retreat?
BB
Skeptic, I left a clue as to where I stand on this issue. but it was buried in the irony and sarcasm of the last ten words of my post.
ReplyDeleteBB
Got it, Bob. Your credibility is restored, as far as I'm concerned!
Delete