Subject:
|
Re: Why not Both?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Jan 2001 07:19:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
548 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Culberson writes:
> > Me, though, I'll be waiting for this macroevolution refutation to be
> > published in Nature, win a Nobel prize of some sort, make it into some
> > refereed journal, something like that, before I'll give it much credence,
> > since it doesn't fit the observations. I won't be holding my breath, though.
> > Literal creationism is a terrible predictor of anything observable.
>
> Okay Larry....I must say I'm starting to see Jon's frustration.
>
> PLEASE tell us even ONE observation that that it doesn't fit. Name
> specifics. We've been very general up to this point. If you can't come
> up with specifics I'll cite a few that Evolutionists commonly bring up
> and show you why they're wrong.
What Larry meant was because Creationism explains everything, it really
explains nothing. "Tigers look like lions" -- God's plan; "Dinosaurs don't
graze on grassy plains all over the world any more" -- God's plan; "Plant
chlorophyll has DNA like some bacteria that photosynthesise for themselves"
-- God's plan. It's good to know it's God's plan, but it doesn't tell us
anything more than that. There are biological questions we don't know the
answer to (because we aren't God), but we can better understand the work of
God by being open to the way the universe actually works. We can't properly
glory in the Creation if we restrict ourselves to the limited scientific
understanding of three thousand years ago, as recorded in Genesis.
--DaveL
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Why not Both?
|
| (...) Before you assume that I am going to answer a question by simply stating "God's Plan" (which I agree is a cop-out if used as a response to every question), why don't you ask one. I will say, however, that you may insert "God's Plan" in front (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
| (...) Thank you for eventually saying this. The topic at hand could be argued in a number of ways but it reaches a very philosophical(sp?) level. (...) Okay Larry....I must say I'm starting to see Jon's frustration. PLEASE tell us even ONE (...) (24 years ago, 25-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
|
|
|
|
