Re: >Re: >Design Flaw in the Brain
Moorad Alexanian (alexanian@UNCWIL.EDU)
Fri, 31 Oct 1997 11:42:37 -0500 (EST)
At 06:59 PM 10/30/97 -0600, Glenn Morton wrote:
>At 09:48 AM 10/30/97 -0600, Eduardo G. Moros wrote:
>>1) I must confess that you know of these things more than I do.
>>2) I must also confess that I see you struggling in establishing some people
>>and their theories to be right and some other people and their theories to be
>>wrong. IMHO, this attitude comes across in a negative way.
>[Intensity mode on; soap box mode on]
>This I want to respond to. I will tell you why I do what I do. I became a
>christian in college before I knew anything about geology (I was a
>physicist). I was taught that the Bible required an anti-evolutionist view
>point. I was further told that it required a young-earth view point. I
>went along. But then I went into geophysics and began to learn geology.
>NOTHING I WAS TAUGHT BY YOUNG-EARTH CREATIONISTS ABOUT GEOLOGY TURNED OUT TO
>BE CORRECT. Every time I tried to verify a detail, I found out that the
>evolutionist was telling me the truth! Every time it was the atheist who
>informed me of new data which contradicted by views, not the
>anti-evolutionary christian in his writings. When I would go on a field trip
>and look at rocks, I would see data that no YEC would talk about and which
>contradicted my viewpoint. I nearly became an atheist because of this.
> I then decided that if they were so wrong in geology maybe I better
>look a bit a biology. I learned of pseudogenes from atheists. I learned of
>speciation events from atheists on Talk Origins. I decided to look at
>anthropology. All the non-evolutionary christians were saying that
>spirituality began either at the Upper Paleolithic transition 40 kyr ago or
>at the origin of H. sapiens 100 kyr ago. They would say that there is no
>evidence of Culture among H. erectus. But this isn't true as I recently posted.
>My point is this. We Christians have a bad habit of ignoring any data that
>contradicts our position. We justify this because we believe that our
>theological position is correct and will be verified in the future.
>Christians MUST live in the world as it IS, not as we WISH it to be or HOPE
>it will be in the future. Until we can become honest with the facts as
>reported by honest scientists we have no right to claim moral superiority.
>If this seems "negative" then so be it. I can not see how Christianity is
>helped by ignoring the huge gap between what IS and what we teach!
>[intensity mode off; soapbox mode off]
>Foundation, Fall and Flood
I joined this list to learn from scientists in fields other than mine,
physics. I must say that I do not know what happened in the past. I do agree
that that can be a legitimate field of scientific study. In cosmology, which
I am somewhat acquainted with, we can conclude all sorts of things from the
data but that still does not say if indeed that is what happened in the
past---cosmology is a purely observational and not an experimental science.
As a Christian I have one concern that perhaps you can answer. How does an
evolutionary development of man brings the Fall of Man into the picture? The
Fall of Man is necessary in the Christian faith and is essential for the
understanding of who Christ is and what He did on the cross for us.