This is going to be a fascinating ride - thank you for beginning it. It is an area that I have at often dipped my toe into, but invariably pulled back on, given the breadth of the scholarship available that requires mastery, and the heat of the exchanges between scholars.
In these areas, in fact in all areas, I share your warning against dogmatism.
I think your predicates are well stated. They mean that we cannot be certain and our findings of necessity must be tentative. Why do we do it then? There is the pure pleasure of it, of course; but I can’t wait to understand your motivations, which I shall await the conclusion of the series to appreciate.
Strapped in and ready to go!!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
@vuyusile!! I was hoping you'd peek in. :)
The main motivation is really to show that it CAN be done. In my intro I share how some react, which can diminish their faith. It's a proud reaction, but understandable. And it was prompted by a real letter to one of my professors.
While the first point up is our anchor, the apologetics value of these sorts of things, IMO, is priceless. We don't need to know for certain if our conclusions are 100% accurate. But we are encouraged in that the entire record we've been given is indeed irreconcilable, and in fact quite logical once we have the information needed.