Volume 92, Issue 88

Tuesday, March 16, 1999


Bible is not factual, but is still true

Blind faith makes flawed defence

CFS poster child

The Gazette is a shocking paper

Disfigured flags are a disgrace

Insults to promote hate

Insults to promote hate

Re: Don't rely on the word of the Bible, March 4

To the Editor:
In Warren Flood's March 4 article "Don't rely on the word of the Bible," he boldly deduced that since he is incapable of making sense of a particular Bible passage, it must necessarily be nonfactual, improbable, incoherent and without unity.

I am very disappointed a Gazette staff writer who seemingly values intellectually sound arguments, relied on a hateful tone and insulting language like: "Uh oh, Jesus Christ, what the hell," to prop up his weak and poorly researched claims.

I am extremely disappointed The Gazette would print an article with such disrespectful, derogatory and insulting overtones. It is one thing to dialogue about the Bible and to civilly disagree. However, Flood's article is a slap in the face. I am fairly confident The Gazette would not print similar articles about other faiths – and rightly so – but why the double standard?

Genesis Chapters 1 and 2 can easily be seen as complementary and not contradictory. Chapter 1:1-2:4a is a general account in chronological order of the days of creation. The second account, starting in Genesis 2:4b, gives a more detailed coverage of certain aspects of Chapter 1. The pattern of placing a more general account before recording certain specific events can be found also in Genesis 10:2-32, where there's a population distribution table. This is followed by Genesis 11:1-10 which tells us what happened at Babel in about the third generation of the distribution genealogy in Genesis 10.

Aristotle's dictum is applicable to Flood's claims: "the benefit of the doubt is to be given to the document itself, not arrogated by the critic to himself."

Teresa de Haan
Law I

To Contact The Opinions Department:

Copyright The Gazette 1999