Re: Codification - To Pangea


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Daystar Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Pangea to Frosty - continued (169.241.10.83) on May 11, 2004 at 12:35:46:

In Reply to: Codification - To Pangea posted by Frosty on May 11, 2004 at 08:09:40:

As for your second point, IMO there is no longer any legitimate basis for scientific debate on the issue of the creation accounts in Genesis. Science was never intended as a MO for "disproving" Genesis. Science seeks simplified truth through empirical investigation; and, proposes theories based on tangible evidence or logical inference. If, as a result, belief in the Genesis account has to be modified, so be it. Science has clearly shown, for instance, that mammalian whales, piscine fishes of all three vertebrate classes, and the numerous phyla of marine invertebrates did NOT appear in the same time period on earth. Science has also clearly shown that planets cannot form in the absence of stars and that galaxies existed before the earth.

All of these scientific observations are at extreme variance with the account in Genesis.

But let’s approach the debate from another perspective: Can the empirical evolutionary evidence of natural science be disproven by “creation science”? Can creationists provide tangible evidence to show the coexistence at the beginning of geologic time of modern and extinct whales, armored jawless and sharks, or ammonites and modern squids? Can creation science provide astronomical evidence to prove that the most distant galaxies are younger than the earth?

The REAL ISSUE in this debate is NOT about what science has to say about origins. Science has abundant evidence to support its conclusions even IF that evidence is ignored or rejected by the creationist community. The REAL ISSUE is whether or not one interprets Genesis as a prosaic, spiritually oriented account of origins or a documentary-like, history of origins.

The FACT that millions of Bible-believing Christians have no problem fitting the ToE into their spiritual beliefs should, at some point, become significant to the creationist camp. The fact that most of these believers see "the hand of God" directing evolution via mutation and natural selection in undetectab


Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject: Re: Re: Codification - To Pangea

Comments:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Daystar Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]