From: jdac (jdac@alphalink.com.au)
Date: Thu Jan 30 2003 - 01:46:22 EST
I think tertiary syphilis is the result of parental misbehaviour, not
the sufferer's.
Do you think the autopsy report is a myth?
Jon
Michael Roberts wrote:
> Yeah but it makes a good story doesn't it! Not only has syphilis been
> suggested but also repressed homosexuality. I haven't checked them
> out, but having considered the nonsense about Darwin's and Buckland's
> illnesses I remain totally sceptical Regards michael
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: jdac
> To: Glenn Morton
> Cc: Michael Roberts ; ASA list
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:40 PM
> Subject: Re: David Livingstone's take on geology and
> creation
> One biography of Miller I read said that an autospy showed
> that he suffered from brain lesions the result of tertiary
> syphylis or a tumour. It was this that almost certainly
> led to his depression, nightmares and sucide. There is no
> evidence what so ever that his work on the science faith
> intrerface led to his sucide.
>
> Jon
>
> Glenn Morton wrote:
>
> >
> > Michael wrote:
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
> > [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On Behalf Of Michael
> > Roberts
> > >Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 10:29
> > >In 1857virtually all scots presbytarians and nearly all
> > anglicans accepted vast ages of geology. At that time
> > there was a lower proportion of>YEC than there are today.
> > (Remember old fashioned evangelicals and fundamentalists
> > believe in an old earth. None of this new-fangled YEC for
> > them) !857 was>also the year when Hugh Miller ppublished
> > Teh testimony of the Rocks - a classic on geology and
> > genesis.Two comments on Miller's book. I am delighted that
> > you do acknowledge here (at least implicitly) that there
> > were YECs. Miller spends an entire chapter on YEC
> > arguments and he wouldn't have done that if they were
> > totally insignificant. Secondly, I have both the American
> > version and the British 1857 version of this work. In the
> > American version, there is an extended preface by the
> > editors which may shed some light upon the expectations
> > with which Miller's book was greeted. Below is from p.
> > 165 of Foundation, Fall and Flood, 1998. It is my view of
> > what was bugging Miller. Before the historians slap me (as
> > they do everytime I touch on history) I will simply say
> > this is my view, and there is some reading between the
> > lines.:
> >
> > *****begin********
> >
> > In the autumn of 1855, an American publisher received an
> > offer for the publication of a new book by Hugh
> > Miller.Miller was a famous British geologist who was also
> > a devout Christian. He had written a very popular book on
> > the Old Red Sandstone. Miller believed the Bible. He was
> > also concerned with the distortions concerning geology,
> > which were being made by his fellow Christians. This new
> > book would address the tension between geology and the
> > Bible.The publishers were very interested and closed the
> > deal at once.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
> > "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
> >
> > Over the next year, advance pages were written and
> > dispatched to the American publisher.As the editor perused
> > the papers they were convinced that this book was a
> > monumental work. They wrote, "It became more and more
> > evident that the work was destined not only to extend his
> > fame, but to establish for him new and special claims to
> > the admiration and gratitude of mankind." The editor felt
> > that Miller had been successful in dealing with the
> > science/religion issue.
> >
> > As Miller struggled with the issues and finished his work,
> > he became more and more depressed.No one knows what was
> > actually going through his mind during the final stages of
> > manuscript preparation but the issues of how to explain
> > the Divine record were clearly on his mind.As a geologist,
> > Miller knew that he had not solved the issue of the
> > flood.All he had done was explain why the Flood could not
> > be global.He had not offered a detailed and successful
> > scenario for the Flood.He had suggested that the Caspian
> > basin was the locale for Noah's flood. His scenario did
> > not allow one to point to a group of rocks and say,
> > "There, those are the rocks deposited by the Flood." All
> > he did was note that the Caspian used to be bigger than it
> > is now, but that does not prove that the Caspian was
> > catastrophically filled. It simply proves that the water
> > is evaporating more rapidly today than the rivers can
> > replenish it. He admitted that he was on weak ground and
> > called his view a 'conjecture'.1 He also admitted that the
> > Flood might have been miraculous rather than natural.2
> > This was almost equivalent to admitting that he had not
> > solved the problem.
> >
> > Miller's despair grew. On the night of December 23, 1856,
> > after finishing the proof reading of his manuscript,
> > Miller called his doctor to dinner.There he told the
> > doctor that he had been up at night for several weeks
> > working on the book.The doctor told him that he had been
> > overworking, that he should stop work and take a rest.
> > Miller agreed that that would be good.
> >
> > After their dinner, Hugh Miller took his bath, and retired
> > to his bedroom. An hour or so later, the maid entered the
> > room and found a look of horror on his face.She fled the
> > room rapidly. Later that night, Hugh Miller, the famous
> > author, wrote a note to his wife, pulled out his pistol
> > and shot himself to death.
> > Christians who do not study geology are unaware of the
> > difficulties this subject presents to the believer, but
> > Hugh Miller knew! While not coming to the depths of
> > despair Miller faced, I have found it very difficult to
> > deal with the misunderstandings of geology I hear from the
> > pulpit.Miller knew, as I know, that what my fellow
> > Christians are teaching about science is not correct.It
> > challenges one's faith when he realizes that most of one's
> > fellow believers are quite willing to make definitive
> > statements about geology and other areas of science when
> > they have never studied the subjects.It is painful to know
> > that Christian apologists regularly ignore observational
> > data.Miller blew his brains
> > out.*******end***********Having now gone through 3 winters
> > in Scotland where Miller committed suicide, I can attest
> > that the constant darkness (very short days) can get one
> > down. That had to have an impact on his point of view.
> > Dec. 23rd is about as dark as it gets--a mere 6 hours of
> > low to the horizon sun. But the thing that struck me was
> > that people were expecting him to have solved the flood
> > problem, and it was obvious that he knew he hadn't.glenn
> >
> > see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
> > for lots of creation/evolution information
> > anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
> > personal stories of struggle
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 30 2003 - 03:19:23 EST