Re: appearance of age and the goodness of God

From: RFaussette@aol.com
Date: Thu Apr 03 2003 - 17:53:42 EST

  • Next message: Bill Payne: "Re: Paraconformities (was test questions)"

    In a message dated 4/3/03 2:26:47 PM Eastern Standard Time,
    igevolution@earthlink.net writes:

    > That's Ken Ham from an AiG newsletter - if you could demonstrate that the
    > morality remained after the creationism died he might (or others like him)
    > be more likely to consider your position. But from what Ham says above, no
    > Christian scientist has conclusively demonstrated that Biblical morality
    > would remain if evolutionary arguments were incorporated.
    >
    > I'm sorry, but that's rediculous. What does Christian Morality hinge on?
    > It hinges on the nature of God and our status as creatures "in His image."
    > It hinges on the decrees given us in the law and our utter inability to
    > meet them. Whether or not God used mechanistic processes to carry out his
    > creative intent has nothing to do with the question. Nor does how long ago
    > that creative process began. That is the biggest red-herring argument I've
    > ever heard.
    >
    > Jason Alley
    >
    >
    >

    I'm going to repeat myself. I wrote: No Christian scientist has conclusively
    demonstrated that Biblical morality would remain if evolutionary arguments
    were incorporated.

    That is Ken Ham's concern, not mine. Ham needs the reassurance, not me. Read
    his quote again. He doesn't care about the science. He's worried the science
    will undermine the morality. If a scientist could reassure Ham that there is
    a rational basis for the morality, he might not care that it was a rational
    explanation as long as it preserved his Biblical morality.

    If that's wrong - who is he and what did he write? Give me a name and a
    title.

    You wrote: Whether or not God used mechanistic processes to carry out his
    creative intent has nothing to do with the question.

    You're right, but from Ken Ham's quote that I offered he rejects the
    mechanistic because he's afriad it will negate the morality.

    Here are Ham's words again, and I repeat they are his words, not mine.

     “If Christian leaders have told the next generation that one can accept the
    world’s teachings in geology, biology, astronomy, etc., and use these to
    (re)interpret God’s Word, then the door has been opened for this to happen in
    every area, including morality.”

    rich

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Apr 03 2003 - 17:54:11 EST