Re: Shapes of a Wedge

From: Al Koop <>
Date: Tue May 18 2004 - 12:19:50 EDT

Jan de Koning wrote:

Is it really necessary that everyone accepts the view that God created
using evolution? If so, it gets us in a quagmire of discussions about
Bible interpretation. Someone without higher education would benefit
little of the discussion, and those of us who want to show how
does not contradict our high view of Biblical Truth would forever be
discussing things while we will be not able to convince those who have
had a thorough scientific education, enforced by a studying of reformed
(Calvinistic) philosophy. I tried, but I was unable to do so, though I
still accepted as a good reformed Calvinist, thanks to a discussion led
someone else in our church. But, all those who did not study science
and/or philosophy still don't believe that what I say is correct.
We all believe, that Jesus Christ died for our sins. Let that be
enough. Teaching "evolution" to non-scientists is practically
I think.

Jan, I agree with you that most Christians do not need to know the
details of evolution, and that teaching it to many nonscientists who do
not wish to spend the time learning all of the background is practically
impossible. But, some of these people also seem to think that they then
can tell scientsts and teachers of science what they should teach in a
science class without doing their homwork (involving of years of time)
to find out what evolution is all about. Scientists should be able to
teach their theories in a coherent and consistent manner as agreed upon
by those who have studied it thoroughly. To change things in science you
should have to convince a significant number those who have studied the
field thoroughly that they may be wrong. Instead with evolution there
is an end run around this procedure by putting this scientific theory
into the political arena.

Two weeks ago an article about an antievolutionary theme park in Florida
was posted by Robert Schneider.
It contained the following:

> Somewhat more creationist in approach is the Nerve-Wracking
> Ball: a bowling ball on a rope, dangling from a tall tree
> branch. A child stands before the ball, and then a park
> guide gives it a shove from a specific angle, so that it
> comes careering back at the child's face only to stop just
> in front of it. The child wins if he does not flinch,
> proving he has "faith in God's laws" - in this case, that a
> swinging object will never come back higher than the point
> from which it took off.

How does one know which of the many human scientific theories are "God's
laws" and worthy of a game in an antievolutionary amusement park? And
which of the many human scientific theories are "just theories" that can
be voted out of science textbooks by some school board or state
legislature on a political whim?

Al Koop

Received on Tue, 18 May 2004 12:19:50 -0400

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 18 2004 - 12:20:48 EDT