Now this the Glenn Morton that even Jim Eisele might come to know and
Seriously, I really like these, Glenn (and foo on George for poo-pooing
such "concordism" -- or whatever it is.) The first parts of the Bible
may be difficult to understand -- being "pre-history" and all ---- but
attempts to understand them as inspired literature, & the attendant
truth, requires attempts like you offer here.
I think it is great -- and might even say that I "agree" --- but that
may be forbidden.
In the scientific domain, Popper's criterion of falsifiability is a
valid one. However, within the constraints of common sense, Biblical
interpretation (especially backed by some data!)is an individual thing.
Glenn Morton wrote:
> Walt, you asked for positive papers, how about
> http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/babel.htm ?
> see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
> for lots of creation/evolution information
> personal stories of struggle
-- =================================== Walt Hicks <firstname.lastname@example.org>
In any consistent theory, there must exist true but not provable statements. (Godel's Theorem)
You can only find the truth with logic If you have already found the truth without it. (G.K. Chesterton) ===================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 01 2002 - 23:06:40 EDT