Re: three overviews of "origins questions"
Dick Fischer (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tue, 09 Jun 1998 13:28:06 -0400
Craig Rusbuilt wrote:
>If you have any comments about the ideas in these papers, or
>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
For one who believes in the evolution of humans from other higher
(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
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
What has always bugged me about Hugh Ross is that in his own discipline
astrophysics he calls for no supernatural interference.=A0 Instead he
foists off his
theory of progressive creation by miraculous intervention on to the
anthropology where he has no credentials.
In general I like what you had to say.=A0 In some ways it parallels what I
My preference is that God, through His preknowledge, fully knows all that
transpire.=A0 You and I were known from the foundations of the earth.=A0
means that god is not required to make interceptions along the way to
a desireable result.=A0 It is only if He is unaware of the future that He
required to make corrections continually to insure an outcome He
In that respect TE involves a higher view of God than does PC.
Dick Fischer, The Origins Solution -