>>Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 16:27:35 -0700 (MST)
>>From: gordon brown <>
>>To: Glenn Morton <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>I don't think this really answers Adrian's question. There is a wide
>>spectrum of positions that could be called OEC, and the fact that some old
>>earth creationists make erroneous statements does not automatically mean
>>that all possible OEC positions have to be wrong.
>>For those who are willing to admit what it is that scientific evidence has
>>shown, the issue becomes what their theology or philosophy of science
>>says. For such a person to be YEC, he would probably have to take Gosse's
>>view and say that scientific observation cannot be trusted because God may
>>have created illusions. This view would have to be countered
>>theologically, and we can't hope to convince such a person if we can't
>>find common ground theologically that is relevant.
>>I take OEC to mean anyone who believes in an old earth but denies common
>>descent of all life from a primitive ancestor. Thus an OEC could believe
>>in only one gap or many gaps. They could also disagree with one another as
>>to why God made gaps in his creation. The TE's opinion that none of the
>>gaps is real reflects his theology or philosophy of science. Until all the
>>gaps are filled, the OEC can still be open to the possibility that some of
>>them may indeed be real. An analogy might be someone putting together a
>>jigsaw puzzle and not knowing for certain that all the pieces were there
>>until it was essentially completed.
This last almost sounds Cantorian. In a quantized world, how on earth does
one every fill every gap? With the discovery of every single transitional
form 2 gaps replace 1 previous gap. Thus the more discoveries we have, the
more gaps we have.
As to the OEC position see my reply today to Adrian.
for lots of creation/evolution information
personal stories of struggle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 16 2002 - 11:31:26 EST