Re: the saddest statement
Wed, 25 Aug 1999 19:34:53 +0000

At 10:53 AM 08/24/1999 -0600, John W. Burgeson wrote:
>Glenn replied:
>"Yes, I see God as omnipotent. I really don't like the idea of a fallible
>What YOU like (or me, for that matter) ought not have any bearing on the

Agreed. Our beliefs and desires should have no relevance. However, if God
is fallible, did God make a mistake and tell us the wrong way to salvation?
I don't know. If He is fallible, how do I know when He made an error?
>Glenn answered:
>"It comes back to the fumbling God idea. God doesn't seem to be like me,
>one who must experiment, fail and then improve. I do appreciate the
>where God supposedly changes his mind. They do bother me and my
>"Fumbling God" is your conjecture, of course. Do you have any scriptural
>citation to suggest God never experiments, fails, then improves? Seems to
>me that the story of Israel is just that sort of story. Does God ever
>change his mind? Scripture is chock full of such instances. Why does the
>PC position suggest to you a "fumbling God?" Can you conceive of a PC
>postilion that does not?

Yes I can. PC has God creating species by fiat, thousands, or millions, of
times during the phanerozoic. YEt each creation went extinct. This implies
that God created failure after failure. A type of PC that does not have a
fumbling god is one in which God creates, but animals don't go extinct. In
that PC God is good enough to get it right the first time. But of course,
the data doesn't support such a view leaving the one in which God keeps
creating animals that can't survive, over and over and over.

Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology

Lots of information on creation/evolution