On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 20:19:02 +0000 glenn morton <mortongr@flash.net>
writes:
>
> Two things: I enjoyed writing the oil company example and it was a
> response
> not to you but to David and his definition of religion, not Luther's
> or
> yours. So I don't think you could have saved me writing the example.
>
>
> glenn
>
It's like Glenn to describe himself as an idolater and then try to
wriggle out of it. It won't work. Indeed, the situation is far worse than
indicated so far because of what the medievals called _consequentia
mirabilis_, the amazing conclusion, namely, that every statement follows
validly from a contradiction. Unless he now denies both being an idolater
and a theist in favor of strict pantheism, his every statement is true,
including all impossibilities. The problem arises through his claim that
the days of Genesis 1:1-2:3 are days of divine announcement before the
creation, that is, the announcement of the _UrIPO_. This requires time
before there could be time, measurement of time in the timeless. The only
way out that I see, in the contemporary understanding of creation, is
requiring that this announcement occurred sometime in the eternal
mass-energy before the Big Bang bubble began to develop. This requires
the deity to be within the pre-universe (or whatever one may call the
state before our universe began), which is a form of pantheism. This
might be rendered consistent and avoid the otherwise inexorable
_consequentia mirabilis_.
IMO, Glenn is right in denying that the days of Genesis are the schedule
of production. But his remedy is worse than 144-hour creationism. It only
denies science, but he makes reason impossible.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 15 2000 - 14:11:23 EST