Re: three overviews of "origins questions"

Dick Fischer (
Tue, 09 Jun 1998 13:28:06 -0400

Craig Rusbuilt wrote:

>If you have any comments about the ideas in these papers, or their
>expression, please share them with me.


"Each position can (and should) propose the creation of humans with a "spiritual
connection" that allows a spiritual relationship between humans and God."

For one who believes in the evolution of humans from other higher primates
(according to God's plan), how would you define "creation?"

"In my opinion, miracles in formative history -- instead of being clearly affirmed (or
denied) by the Bible, or being always (or never) indicated by gaps in science --
are "possible but not necessary."


"As far as I know, with my limited knowledge of astrophysics, there are no serious
challenges to theories proposing that natural processes produced galaxies, stars,
and planets."

What has always bugged me about Hugh Ross is that in his own discipline of
astrophysics he calls for no supernatural interference.=A0 Instead he foists off his
theory of progressive creation by miraculous intervention on to the science of
anthropology where he has no credentials.

In general I like what you had to say.=A0 In some ways it parallels what I hold to.
My preference is that God, through His preknowledge, fully knows all that will
transpire.=A0 You and I were known from the foundations of the earth.=A0 Knowing
means that god is not required to make interceptions along the way to cause
a desireable result.=A0 It is only if He is unaware of the future that He would be
required to make corrections continually to insure an outcome He prefers.

In that respect TE involves a higher view of God than does PC.

Dick Fischer, The Origins Solution -