Re: A word of appreciation

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed Sep 29 2004 - 02:32:18 EDT

Vernon,
You make these silly assertions from time to time but never substantiate them.

Would you mind telling us what these disputed assumptions and deductions about the age of the earth and geological time in general are.

Your continued refusal to do so indicates that your ideas are bluff and hot air.

Michael
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Vernon Jenkins
  To: Sheila Wilson ; asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 11:07 PM
  Subject: Re: A word of appreciation

  Well spoken, Sheila!

  It is clear that Michael fails to distinguish between a widely-held view of earth history (based upon certain disputed assumptions and deductions) and mathematical certainty. This is a serious weakness which he would do well to put right.

  Vernon
  www.otherbiblecode.com
    

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Sheila Wilson
    To: asa@calvin.edu
    Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 1:54 PM
    Subject: Re: A word of appreciation

    As a geologist, I absolutely agree with your assessment of the earth's age. Unfortunately, mankind's assessment of things has been very wrong in the past. The bottom line is we don't know but, given our knowledge of the evidence, we believe the earth is 4.6 billion years old. We must not forget our fallibility - that will cause us to make the same mistake as young earth creationists.

    Sheila

    Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
      Can scientists afford to ignore the unsolicited sign that the earth is 4.6 by old and every attempt to disprove it has been found to be false and mischievous. He surely intends us to sit up, take notice and together consider what its implications might be.

      Michael who accepts the Babylonian maths in Genesis
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Vernon Jenkins
        To: Sheila Wilson ; Michael Roberts
        Cc: asa@calvin.edu
        Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 9:53 PM
        Subject: Re: A word of appreciation

        Hi Sheila,

        You said "... my salvation is not dependent upon my beliefs in the age of the earth or numerical solutions or probabilities but solely on my relationship with God through Jesus Christ." Of course, I agree with you. However, I believe that those Christians having a scientific background cannot afford to ignore the unsolicited 'sign' that has now appeared at the very portal of God's Word. For, having placed it there, He surely intends us to sit up, take notice and together consider what its implications might be.

        Vernon
        www.otherbiblecode.com

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: Sheila Wilson
          To: Michael Roberts
          Cc: asa@calvin.edu
          Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 3:39 PM
          Subject: Re: A word of appreciation

          Stymied Michael,

          As a co-infidel, I agree with you and will add that my salvation is not dependent upon my beliefs in the age of the earth or numerical solutions or probabilities but solely on my relationship with God through Jesus Christ. Debate on most of these subjects is fun and interesting but not critical to my salvation.

          Saved by Grace Sheila

          sheila-wilson@sbcglobal.net

    Sheila McGinty Wilson
    sheila-wilson@sbcglobal.net
Received on Wed Sep 29 04:18:44 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Sep 29 2004 - 04:18:47 EDT