Re: YEC and interpretations (was: Re: asa-digest V1 #3214)

From: RFaussette@aol.com
Date: Wed Mar 19 2003 - 12:16:06 EST

  • Next message: RFaussette@aol.com: "Re: Ken Ham"

    In a message dated 3/19/03 11:18:35 AM Eastern Standard Time,
    jarmstro@qwest.net writes:

    > My "Mmm" post was not to ding you, ...just a thought stimulated by your
    > post. Your post led me to think that this might be a reasonable question to
    > ask to perhaps level the field a little when the "theory" card is played in
    > creationist conversation. Regards JimA
    >
    >

    I was not sensitive to your 'ding,' Jim but to the entire debacle of
    creationism. Ham is right. Morality must be protected. He's wrong in his
    method. Scientists who say the morality can be laxed or eliminated are
    scientifically wrong since Judaism, has been studied as an evoluitonary
    strategy and has been shown to proffer quality and quantity births and
    subsequent material success based on that morality. If more people understood
    that and understood ancient religious warfare, you'd understand "everything."
    I would suggest spending NO time arguing with creationists, but instead
    reading Kevin MacDonald's trilogy on Judaism
    rich



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Mar 19 2003 - 12:17:05 EST