Re: Phil Johnson on Focus on the Family

Moorad Alexanian (
Thu, 06 May 1999 09:42:21 -0400

Science can be reduced to: if A, then B. You state your A and I know why B
follows. [Actually you do not have a scientific theory but an explanation
devoid of predictive power--the most important ingredient in a scientific
theory.] Basically you have an amalgamation of science and religion. To me
scientific theories do not need God. Answers to fundamental question do need
God. The issue is whether the question of origins is a scientific question
or not. I say no, you say yes. There we have it!


-----Original Message-----
From: <>
To: <>
Cc: <>
Date: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: Phil Johnson on Focus on the Family

>Moorad wrote,
><< I have often said that the Fall of Man is a problem for theistic
> Wherein comes the will of man to fall in theistic evolution? >>
>Exactly what is the problem you see? If an animal not in the image of God
>develops or is by divine intervention modified so as to be in the image of
>God, and that now "made-in-the-image-of-God" animal is aware of God's will
>and chooses to disobey, to me, that is the Fall of Man. Why not?
>Paul S.