At 10:33 PM 2/25/00 -0600, Bill Payne wrote:
>
>I would say that a conclusion can be drawn only if we know what the
>product (in this case a series of numbers) was intended, by its creator,
>to look like. To say that a 4, or commas, or anything else is missing is
>to assume that we can read the intentions of Allen, or that we can
>delimit for Allen his range of possibilities. Since we have no
>communication from Allen, we have no way of knowing whether anything is
>missing or not. Only if Allen tells us what the series is supposed to
>look like, will we be able to know what, if anything, is missing.
>
>With respect to the cosmos, the mind of God as revealed in Scripture
>gives us some boundaries within which to work.
Assuming that you are reading it correctly and not mangling it. And given
mankinds penchant for messing things up that becomes a big assumption.
>
>And this is what
>>young-earth creationism does, it limits the possible interpretations
>>of the
>>Scripture to just one, and then says that that is the only possible
>>answer.
>> It is important not to limit a view to simply one possibility until
>>the
>>data requires it.
>
>Meaning you're open to YEC?
Actually Bill, I can document that I was open to YEC. I published 20+
papers and one book advocating it in the early 1980s. Do you have any equal
documentary evidence that you are open to a non-global flood view of the
world? If anyone has a claim to having an open mind about these things, I
do, because I have been on both sides of this issue during my life. I
proved my open mindedness when I changed views. But I haven't seen any
evidence of a similar openness by you.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 26 2000 - 14:53:45 EST