Dear Bob,,

"Ignore-ance , that which you ignore, is not just what you don't know...it's also what you won't know."

We don't really know each other but I feel I do know the how and why of your theological thinking.  I spent three decades thinking , processing and explaining the Bible , for the most part minus the specialness of me personally as spoken of in the scriptures, as you do.  I used to believe that the way to crack the Bible Code was to hunt and cobble scripture together, from both Old and New Testaments in the traditional misapplication of the concept of , "line upon line, precept upon precept. Here a little there a little."  I have explained to you , and former colleagues, to the best of my own understanding, how HWA and the Churches of God ministry have misunderstood and misapplied the scripture.  I realize "I was mistaken" is not in the vocabulary of the Church or it's leaders for the most part, but in this you and they are mistaken.

Art Mokarrow once chided me for speaking as if I knew better than he and spoke  with too much confidence, as I assume any man would on any topic he believed in.  When I pointed out to him that it was he that had written a book entitled "God's Puzzle Solved!" and that when one uses the words  "God's", "puzzle" and "solved" in the same sentence, that can be construed as believing one knows everything themselves and may be on the edge of a bit too much confidence.  He just said, "Well, that's not what I mean."

But that's exactly what he meant. 

I know you are sincere in your beliefs as I am in mine and all others in theirs.  But some Church of God ministers make incredibly bold and self centered claims about themselves and actually see themselves spoken of in the scriptures and always the Old Testament.  Gerald Flurry does.  Dave Pack certainly does and you seem to by your own words at times.  Herbert W. Armstrong started this concept rolling with his own perceptions of himself and promoted to the extreme by men such as Gerald Waterhouse, both of whom are now long deceased with Flurry and Pack building their ridiculous religious foundations on the wood, hay and stubble of HWA's self concept.

At any rate, because of the dangers many perceive in the ministries like Gerald Flurry's and Dave Pack's, it is important to keep it all in the public eye for consideration and rejection if need be for mental, emotional and theological safety's sake.  

When I lived on the east coast, I offered to "debate" Dave Pack on anything from his self concept of he seeing himself spoken of in the scriptures to creationism vs evolution.  But, alas, Dave only bombasts from behind the walls of Wadsworth Castle.  I do admit to being impressed with how well Dave was easily dismantled by good science done well as explained to him by the series challenging his "Irrefutable Proofs of God."

And now I live on the Pacific Northwest Coast, mere blocks from the library HWA spent "six months of intensive study" and three blocks from the church he went to be baptised in.

You have dismissed the truth of evolution(as I would expect you to do with a mere 6000 year old template and literalist view) and good science done well with your four easy points that disprove evolution, but you have to know that dismissing such highly studied science such as paleontology and human origins are not easily dismissed in four simple ways unless you are preaching to the choir who have no idea themselves how to explain your four simple points.  Send your four points to Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson and see how that goes for you.  I have found the puzzle solving , code breaking and simple points to refuting complex topics to be found wanting personally.

I have forwarded your for simple  points  to Aron Ra, who did the series on Dave Pack's series on The Irrefutable God so he may or  may not take the time to respond as only he can. Stay tuned.

All that to say, let's discuss these matters and reason together for fun and clarity .  Perhaps in front of your local church, or in your own studio, transcribed and video taped as I did with Art Mokarrow in Tyler a few years back and sponsored by The Journal?  I don't claim to be an expert in these matters, but they have caught my attention for the past 30 years spending time on both sides of these issues.  Let's call it a public discussion and not even a debate.  No one has to win, nor would they as sides taken don't change much as we know until personal factors and issues resolve themselves in the mind of each individual over years of consideration and experience.  

Just a thought....Off to work