The search for Adam and Eve

[Carolyn Franklin]

I've enjoyed reading this thread. I wish that I could add it to my "notes" on Facebook. Maybe I can add the url? I now see the "Publish to Facebook". I'm gonna try it.

[Gina Stevenson]

Carolyn, did that FB thing work? [well, guess we could check out your FB page and find out, huh!?]

[Jon Bemis]

I began this thread several months ago asking for input how to aid the conversation for people who are truly seeking to make peace between Scripture and scientific discovery.

Here's an article by Carl Leth (Professor of Theology and Dean of the School of Theology and Christian Ministry at ONU) that speaks to the issue of the dialogue between faith and science. He says, "Scientific imperialism and Biblical Fundamentalism stand at opposing ends of this engagement and call us to the margins. Either we offer an unqualified surrender to the authority of science to determine the boundaries of our conversation or we demand the submission of science to (particular) Biblical conditions. There is much more talking “at” each other than talking “with” each other."
Worth reading IMO.

[Randy Wise]

If the opportunity presents itself to help them better understand Christian beliefs, I will fully engage in that conversation just as I would with a fellow evangelical who is misinformed.

Just answer the door when they ring the door bell

Seriously "I" can't see Jesus not telling one who belongs to Him in a relationship that the Morman movement wasn't from above. He has ways of communicating with His own.



Randy

[Daniel Hamlin]

I've been pondering this for a while and I finally have a chance to respond. I'm just stating some thoughts, not necessarily staking out a position. I'm just trying to prompt more discussion.

1) Our salvation does not even depend on believing the items above. Salvation is not a matter of correct belief. According to Paul, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God-- not the result of works, so that no one may boast” (Eph 2:8-9). That does not mean that we do not have to respond in faith to that grace. But that response is not strictly in believing the right things. That is, it is not mental assent to a set of propositions (which renders things like the “Roman Road to Salvation” of less use than many imagine since it is premised on logical assent to propositions). It is a matter of accepting what God has provided and letting that work out in how we live. Part of our problem is that evangelicals have tended to focus almost entirely on “salvation” rather than taking a larger view of what it means to be in relationship with God.

While my original post was more rhetorical than anything, what you posted above has been on my mind for a while. If salvation was based on mentally assenting to a correct set of propositional beliefs, then we could never be sure our own beliefs were "correct enough".

From "Not A Fan" by Kyle Idleman:

Many have made a decision to believe in Jesus without making a commitment to follow Jesus. The gospel allows for no such distinction. Biblical belief is more than mental assent or verbal acknowledgement...When we decide to believe in Jesus without making a commitment to follow him, we become nothing more than fans.

So, I realize the Christian life requires more than just a mental assent to a set of truths, but it would also seem that correctness of belief also factors in. I'm just not sure what is the correct amount of "correctness", if that makes any sense.

Furthermore, the fact that Christians hold a variety of positions, many of which are contradictory, would also indicate that someone's position is wrong. So, how can I be sure my own beliefs are "correct"?

Belief in the “correct” things, as opposed to faith in God, is a function of Christian maturity, not a condition of salvation. Those who would make it otherwise have misunderstood something about the nature of grace.

Perhaps I still don't understand the nature of grace.

[Dennis Bratcher]

So, I realize the Christian life requires more than just a mental assent to a set of truths, but it would also seem that correctness of belief also factors in. I'm just not sure what is the correct amount of "correctness", if that makes any sense.

Furthermore, the fact that Christians hold a variety of positions, many of which are contradictory, would also indicate that someone's position is wrong. So, how can I be sure my own beliefs are "correct"?

You cannot, as John Widely said so eloquently in On A Catholic Spirit :

Although every man necessarily believes that every particular opinion which he holds is true (for to believe any opinion is not true, is the same thing as not to hold it), yet can no man be assured that all his own opinions, taken together, are true. In fact, every thinking man is assured they are not, seeing humanum est errare et nescire: "To be ignorant of many things, and to mistake in some, is the necessary condition of humanity." This, therefore, he understands, applies to himself as well. He knows, generally, that he himself is mistaken; although in what particular opinions he is mistaken, he does not, perhaps he cannot, know.

But then, as I said before, relationship with God is not dependant on the correctness of our beliefs. There is no "minimum percentage" of correctness of belief that qualifies us to be Christian. That is why religious prejudice, whether it be against Catholics, Pentecostals, Southern Baptists, liberals, or "heretics" has no place in Christianity. It is one thing to define a specific community of Faith by doctrine. It is quite another to define relationship with God in terms of correct belief.

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[Cam Pence]

Great article...I had Dr. Leth for several classes at ONU when I wanted to be a youth pastor and thought I had no need for theology. Reading stuff like this makes me wish I could jump in the Delorian, gun it to 88, and take my studies seriously.

[John Kennedy]

You cannot, as John Widely said so eloquently in On A Catholic Spirit :

Although every man necessarily believes that every particular opinion which he holds is true (for to believe any opinion is not true, is the same thing as not to hold it), yet can no man be assured that all his own opinions, taken together, are true. In fact, every thinking man is assured they are not, seeing humanum est errare et nescire: "To be ignorant of many things, and to mistake in some, is the necessary condition of humanity." This, therefore, he understands, applies to himself as well. He knows, generally, that he himself is mistaken; although in what particular opinions he is mistaken, he does not, perhaps he cannot, know.

But then, as I said before, relationship with God is not dependant on the correctness of our beliefs. There is no "minimum percentage" of correctness of belief that qualifies us to be Christian. That is why religious prejudice, whether it be against Catholics, Pentecostals, Southern Baptists, liberals, or "heretics" has no place in Christianity. It is one thing to define a specific community of Faith by doctrine. It is quite another to define relationship with God in terms of correct belief.

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

Dennis -
Did you really mean to turn John Wesley into John Widely? I realize he believed the world was his parish, but the expansion was a bit unexpected.

[Dennis Bratcher]

Dennis -
Did you really mean to turn John Wesley into John Widely? I realize he believed the world was his parish, but the expansion was a bit unexpected.

That's what happens when you have grandkids hanging around when you're typing. But it's a distraction I wouldn't trade for the world.

db