
Originally Posted by
Jon Peters

Originally Posted by
sastark

Originally Posted by
Jon Peters
I don't think I have an evolutionary mindset, but I do think that it is fair to reevaluate what the Bible says when confronted with scientific evidence. We should not force an interpretation that is not tenanble. Nor should we lower our view of Scripture to accomodate such a scientific belief. Nonetheless, I don't think that it is inherrently wrong to reevaluate our understanding of cetain passages in Scripture when faced with seemingly incompatable scientific claims. If there are no such reasonable interpretations, I will stand with the truths of Scripture.
So, the infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is not the Scripture itself, but
Scripture and nature?
No, that's not what I said. I said that it is permissable to reevaluate our interpretation of Scripture based on natural revelation, NOT to interpret Scripture based on natural revelation.
You just restated what sastark just said, namely using Scripture AND natural revelation as the infallible rule for interpreting Scripture.
Brian Eschen
Ruling Elder, PCA
Pleasanton, California
"When the Lion roars, all the beasts of the forest tremble: when King Jesus speaks, the Kings of the earth should keep silent."
-Samuel Davies to King George II (1755)
Bookmarks