Moorad wrote:
>I can't make any sense out of your post. I hope you do not mean what I think
>you mean. Moorad
I think PJ is to Christianity as Pete Rose is to baseball, only
worse. When we are unable to reach scientists and well-educated
individuals because they reject the gospel message as unbelievable, they
spend an eternity in hell. That's HELL, Moorad. PJ's message is
counterproductive, in my estimation, meaning that on balance we lose more
than we win. Reduced to simple terms, PJ's message is that if there is a
God there can be no evolution, or if evolution is true, there is no
God. (If I misunderstand that then please correct me.)
Contrast that message with Howard Van Till's that there is a God and there
is evolution. If Howard is wrong, no harm done. If PJ is wrong (and he
is), he has given all those who know or believe in the science of evolution
a reason to disbelieve. His message only hardens those who might otherwise
believe. At the same time, he gives Christians a false message which
sounds plausible enough, but do we gain any new Christians? I think not.
If I thought that my message had the potential of causing any person to
reject the gospel of Jesus Christ I would rather that God remove me from
the playing field. Far better my physical life be shortened then that
anyone should endure an eternity of "weeping," "wailing," and "gnashing of
teeth" (Matt. 8:12; 13:42; 13:50; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30; Luke 13:28).
We might disagree as to whether his overall impact is positive or negative,
but many on this list have voiced strong objections to his message, and I
agree with them. Would Christianity fare better with some if its soldiers
off the battle field and in the infirmary? Yes, I believe it would.
Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution - www.orisol.com
"The answer we should have known about 150 years ago"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 29 2001 - 11:00:09 EDT