From: John Burgeson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Jan 25 2003 - 12:28:57 EST
I had written: "I have commented before on the rather silly concept of a
rich responded: "I came to this list because you were all Christians and
scientists. How can one dialog scientifically with the above?"
Perhaps by asking what I mean, and why I used the word "silly" to describe a
Science works by induction (mostly). The game of science is to think up
models, usually math models, which describe observational data and suggest
future research which will either support those models ar falsify them.
In no case that I know about does science "prove" anything. Models become
more and more supported over time, of course, until they are often referred
to as "facts." But even "facts" are subject to being disproven at some
Scientific laws are descriptive, not prescriptive.
Does that help?
Rich also wrote (in part): "...many gays attend my church. We don't talk
about one another's sins. We just build community."
That's certainly one goal of a church fellowship. What church (denomination)
"The suggestion that I am intolerant or hateful because I hold this position
is absolutely ridiculous."
I don't know that anyone suggested this, much less said it overtly.
"Gays should defer to those who carry the full weight of the Cross. That is
not intolerant or hateful. That is logical and appropriate."
I am sorry. I have no idea what you mean by this. Do you mean that some of
our fellow Christians are second class members? I hope not.
John W. Burgeson (Burgy)
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jan 25 2003 - 12:29:36 EST