At 01:21 PM 1/3/98 -0600, Eduardo G. Moros wrote:
>I repeat, I agree with you in part. I believe new theories are under
>development and it will take time.
Tell me about them? What do they hypothesize?
>
>On another point I would like to say that theistic evolutionists (TE)
>are not unanimous when it comes to how God "acts" in evolution. That is
>to say that most TE use the same data (to create theories) that
>atheistic evolutionists (AE) use (to create their purely naturalistic
>theories from beginning to end.) The fact that you have a picture of how
>it took place it does not mean you are rigth.
Of course it doesn't mean I am right. But I fail to see the relevance of
TE's having different ideas about how it occurred. YECs have different
ideas also. What does this get us?
IOW, how would you (TE)
>explain to a AT the work of God in evolution, your (TE's) theories. I
>can easily conclude that you (TE) don't really have ONE theory, you (I
>mean TE) are just riding along with AE in the same wagon.
Absolutely not. I am going to spend eternity with you the atheist won't. So
we are not at all in the same wagon.
> Why should I
>take the TE position instead of the AE position. Both positions are not
>generally accepted, both are incomplete, both have problems and both are
>changing all the time.
I would say that evolution is more generally accepted than you are
indicating here. and indeed this statement contradicts what you said the
other day about being outgunned. If AE is not generally accepted, then why
are you complaining that there are so few scientists working on the creation
solutions?
you too have a good weekend.
glenn
Adam, Apes, and Anthropology: Finding the Soul of Fossil Man
and
Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm