Walter Hicks wrote:
> george murphy wrote:
>> Given your reply to Dave, I'm not sure whether you're
>> interested primarily in "fun" or apologetics. If the 1st then your
>> idea is perhaps worthy of a 1/2 hour Twilight Zone episode. If the
>> latter then I'd alter Dave's evaluation to "preposterouser and
>> preposterouser." An alternate universe with rivers named Tigris &
>> Euphrates & a land named Assyria?
> Hey George,
> Your theology is appreciated!
> But: I figured that it's not worth wasting any more ASA time. I was,
> however, quite serious about the possibility. If that is ridiculous,
> then where do you place Hawkings (and others) notion of an infinite
> number of spontaneous universes -- or the many universe interpretation
> of quantum mechanics? (Do I correctly recall that you accept that QM
> interpretation?) . I just don't think that God should have
> intellectual limits placed on Him that physics will not place on
> itself. Moreover, I think that it very unreasonable to assume
> (a-priori) that God is more limited than mankind would be if
> "creating" AI for robots.
I think that things like the many worlds interpretation of
quantum theory or the "bubble universe" idea are interesting approaches
to some questions in physics, though not nearly as compelling as some of
their partisans think. But I see no justrification for thinking that
that kind of thing is what Genesis 1 & 2 are talking about.
George L. Murphy
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Dec 19 2001 - 12:04:00 EST