Re: >Re: >RE: What does ID mean?

Glenn R. Morton (
Fri, 01 May 1998 19:16:07 -0500

At 01:06 PM 5/1/98 -0500, Moorad Alexanian wrote:
>The point I am making is that God is not bound to the laws that we use to
>describe nature.

But Moorad, God is also not bound to do exactly the opposite of what our
science indicates either. It would seem deceptive for the universe to
appear as if our laws worked and then ultimately we find they have nothing
to do with the actual operation of it. If the claim were made that it is
our fault for misunderstanding things, it would seem that under this
assumption our observational data is worthless for determining truth. If
it is worthless for determining truth, how can we ascertain the
truthfulness or lack there of for the Scripture which we also evaluate via
our sense data. Undermining observational data, undermines the ability to
determine truth not only about the physical world, but also of te spiritual.

Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information