Well that would depend on what you mean by receptive to new ideas. If you mean by that, people should hold opposing and contradictory views in the area of truth, then you are throwing basic logic out the window. For instance I can't believe that Christ both rose physically from the dead and that he didn't rise physically from the dead, at the same and in the same relationship. Can you? If on the other hand as I suspect, you really believe that Truth does not exist, then that belief is itself, an absolute belief. That is what I meant by being dogmatic about not believing in dogma. People who hold the later view are quite free to do so, but to characterize that as being open minded is farcical. It's not open to new ideas that challenge it's basic premise any more than mine is.
The real question that should be raised is how valid are our underlying assumptions. The Bible does indeed claim to be a revelation from God Himself, but those claims are rooted in historical space time events that can be examined and disproved, from many perspectives. Advances in Archeology have verified one claim after another that were previously considered to be only mythical. The sheer weight of the Manuscript evidence is overwhelmingly in support of the biblical claim that God's word would be preserved. Prophecies were made and many were fulfilled, while some await a final conclusion. The fat lady isn't singing yet, but she's getting warmed up. The Bible says that at the culmination of history as we know it, Jerusalem, would become the focal point of all the world, and that Jesus Christ Himself will come and settle the matter Himself. This may not occur in my life time, but all the pieces are on the table now.
What about the assumptions of moral relativism? Now that's whacked! It starts with the unwarranted assumption that God does not exist, but if anything exists now, then something has always had to have existed. That, or you must believe in spontaneous generation out of nothing, with no causal agent. A self existent, eternal something, or everything from nothing. Which seems more logical to you?
Greg |
