To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 8984
8983  |  8985
Subject: 
Re: Why not Both?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 24 Jan 2001 01:29:42 GMT
Viewed: 
403 times
  
Jon Kozan wrote:

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jon Kozan writes:
(off topic)
Evolution is man's construct. It actually doesn't fit with man's science -
but
that's another thread.

Indeed another topic-- and maybe not even another thread... but I probably
won't join in on it, just because I don't feel qualified to do so, and as
such I don't think I could provide much that'd be useful to the debate. Were
I more informed, maybe. But for now I'll just stick to the philosophical
side of things. :)

Philosphically - what would your logic say if it were shown that science does
not contradict the Bible - not prove it necessarily, but supported a literal
interpretation of it?

What if science supported that the earth is young and not billions of years
old?

What if science could prove that we could not have come into existance without
another causal force - a creator?


Who created the creator?


--
| Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support     Netscape Communications
Corp
| iPlanet Support - http://www.iplanet.com/support/    A division of AOL Time
Warner
|      Please do not associate my personal views with my employer



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) Hey, no fair, I was gonna ask that one. Did already, actually. :-) (URL) towards the bottom... :-) ++Lar (23 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) Here we come to what is seemingly an impossible thing to answer: HOWEVER: If you are already in a position where you say you believe the Bible the answer is simple - the Bible clearly states that God always was, is, and always will be (sorry, (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) Philosphically - what would your logic say if it were shown that science does not contradict the Bible - not prove it necessarily, but supported a literal interpretation of it? What if science supported that the earth is young and not billions (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

88 Messages in This Thread:




























Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR