Shuan Rose wrote:
> Its not clear to me that the creation of the universe was
>for the sole
> purpose of providing a space shuttle for Man. I believe-along with CS Lewis-
> that there may be many other older intelligences with whom God is in
> relation. However, even if this were not true, we really cannot question the
> why and how of the creation of the universe. See Job 38-41.Its God's
> universe , and he creates it the way he wants to.
Ephesians 1:10 sheds some light on this.
George L. Murphy
"The Science-Theology Interface"
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On
> Behalf Of Walter Hicks
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 6:41 PM
> To: bivalve
> Cc: asa
> Subject: Re: My Daughter is a YEC
> bivalve wrote:
> > >Now when I read some of the ASA statements, there is nothing to rule
> > >out YEC as something acceptable to ASA. Yet the posts I see indicate
> > >a totally different story.<
> > For me, the distinction is in the general practice of YEC versus an
> > absolute statement ruling it out. The scientific evidence supports
> > an old earth and extensive biological evolution. Most popular YEC
> > deals with this problem through denial, false claims, and similarly
> > unacceptable ways. However, if someone recognizes this, yet holds a
> > YEC view in spite of this (e.g., by considering scientific evidence
> > unimportant or by hoping that new discoveries will overturn the work
> > of the past few centuries), they are not making false claims about
> > science. For example, someone on the list a few years ago suggested
> > that the universe was created a few thousand years ago, but with the
> > full appearance of a 15 billion year history of natural processes in
> > order to better enable us to understand natural processes. This view
> > is internally consistent and compatible with all available scientific
> > evidence. To me, it seems unnecessarily complex; presumably he found
> > an old-earth interpretation !
> > of Genesis 1 unnecessarily complex.
> We might be thinking of the same person if it was on another list. The
> claim that I heard, and it actually has some merit is as follows:
> The universe was created, via Jesus, for man -- if we accept a simple
> interpretation of the Gospel of John. That being given, there really is
> no necessity for God to force all of the 15 Billion years to pass by in
> order to arrive at the point of introducing mankind into the universe.
> In short, He starts the clock ticking several thousands of years ago
> with all the history in place. Somewhat like a programmer might do it
> setting up the background for a simulation or a theatre in setting the
> scenery for a play.
> It seemed to me to be a theory that would hold water for even Glenn --
> at least prior to Adam. I could never find any scientific or
> philosophical reason to discount it. I'm certain others can!
> 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 : Fri May 24 2002 - 17:29:46 EDT