Your Letters |

Your Letters

Post IndependentGlenwood Springs, CO Colorado

Man’s logic is many times seemingly with merit, but truly lacking in validity. It brings him to a conclusion inevitable by confining logic. Assumptions that are not valid in one’s logic do not prove a point at all. That is the case of Craig Chisesi’s Dec. 3 letter on “The Genesis of the Bible.”He wrote, “It’s an oral history, passed down, word of mouth, from father to son. From Adam to Seth, from Seth to Enos, from Enos to Caanan; for 40 generations a growing, changing story, passed down, word of mouth, father to son.”The assumption that oral tradition is not reliable is questionable. Take the record of the flood in Genesis as one reference point.McClintock & Strong’s Cyclopedia states in part, “The truth of the Mosaic history of the deluge is confirmed by the tradition of it which universally obtained. A tradition of the deluge, in many respects accurately coinciding with the Mosaic account, has been preserved almost universally among the ancient nations. It is a very remarkable fact concerning the deluge that the memory of almost all nations begins with the history of it, even of those nations which were unknown until they were discovered by enterprising voyagers and travelers; and that traditions of deluge were kept up in all the rites and ceremonies of the Gentile world …”This means that word of mouth played an accurate transmission of the flood to these cultures. The fact that we have removed ourselves from memorizing stories, passages, etc., does not mean the human mind is not capable of doing so with great accuracy over generations.Prior to the arrival of the printing press, students memorized books. The mind of man is capable of great feats. Our access to information today is a marvel, but it does not inspire much memorization.The human mind is very capable of things well beyond any computer. Maybe there is something more to oral tradition than papier-mch. Word of mouth may be very accurate.James A. LeggSilt

“For the children” we were begged to raise our taxes in these hard economic times. The children needed new textbooks. The children couldn’t learn if class sizes increased. The children would be deprived of school sports unless we sacrificed a little more. That’s the propaganda the teachers’ union so piously spewed before the vote. A slim majority of well-meaning, gullible voters (upvalley) believed these charlatans and they got their extra money. But folks, it was never for the children. Michael Larime’s letter of Dec. 26 lays bare the true purpose for our school taxes. Larime says they don’t need new books, class size really doesn’t matter and who needs school sports. Nope, what that extra money should be used for is fatter pay checks for teachers.Teachers who work less than eight months a year and get paid for 12 will be magically transformed into smarter, more caring, super teachers if we give them the money. Our children will get by with those out-dated books. Large classes and sports programs don’t matter. Just hand over the money and our children will be well and prosper.Michael Larime and the teachers’ union assure you this is true. Aren’t we glad so many voted yes, “for the children”? Bruno KirchenwitzRifle

Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Glenwood Springs and Garfield County make the Post Independent’s work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.


Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User