On Tue, 27 Jun 1995 09:35:01 -0500 you wrote:
>Jeff Cunningham writes
JC>Quarks and macro-evolution are both better mathematical
>models than observable realities, but the implications of evolution hold a
>far greater weight.
BH>I would dispute that macroevolution (as originally conceived
anyway) is a
>mathematical model... But this is a side issue.
>
JC>If quarks were suddenly observed today, most of world
>might notice, but probably continue on. Evolution tells us(presumably) of
>our origins. This has significant weight in the area of philosophy. In a
>day and age where the meaning of life has been discussed in volumes of
>literature, the evolution or direct creation of man touches on every person
>and the perception of this truth will determine the course and direction of
>their life.
>Again, it is the perception of reality which determines the course of our
>thinking and subsequently our actions.
I agree with Jeff. There is no comparison between the Darwinian
revolution
and other scientific revolutions. Darwin's revolution affected man's
idea of
himself and his meaning of life.
BH>Jeff, it seems to me that there is an implicit assumption in your
argument
>that if evolution is the correct model of how life developed, then life did
>not develop under God's sovereignty, or perhaps even that God did not
>create. I don't see why it is necessary to make that assumption. Col 1:17
>says "And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together".
>It seems to me that Paul is saying that God is sovereign over the entire
>universe, from quarks to galaxies. Logically then, if evolution does
>occur, God is sovereign over it moment by moment, and it produces only what
>He Himself ordains it should produce.
No doubt there is a huge element of truth in what you say Bill. But
was Paul's
idea of God the same as what modern theistic evolutionists maintain?
Paul, above anyone, had every reason to believe in an interventionist
God. After all Paul met Him on the Road to Damascus!
I keep asking the same question. If God can intervene directly and
supernaturally
in human history (against a general background of normal, regular,
historical process), why cannot God intervene directly in biological
history (against a
general background of normal, regular, biological process)?
Do you know I have posted this at least 3 times and AFAIK no one from
the
TE side has got back to me on it?
God bless.
Stephen
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones | ,--_|\ | sjones@iinet.net.au |
| Perth | / Oz \ | http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Australia | -> *_,--\_/ | phone +61 9 448 7439 |
------------------------- v ------------------------------------