Re: Phil Johnson

From: george murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Sat Sep 29 2001 - 16:38:26 EDT

  • Next message: Stephen J. Krogh: "RE: Phil Johnson"

    "Moorad Alexanian" wrote:

    > I believe that if the word evolution is understood to mean that living things
    > came from nonliving and that the whole process from nonliving to humans is
    > based solely on mutations and natural selection, then it is true that if
    > evolution is true, then the God of the OT is nonexistent is a true statement.

            I.e., if God had nothing to do with evolution then God was not involved
    with the development of life. This is an uninteresting tautology.

    > To me hell is finding truth too late. I believe the later was stated by
    > philosopher John Locke. Theistic evolutionists walk a rather thin line between
    > deism and theism.

            I know of no basis at all for the last sentence. I don't like the term
    "theistic evolution" because the difference between "belief in God" and belief in
    the Holy Trinity is profound. But if "theistic evolution" means anything it isn't
    simply "belief in God" plus "belief in evolution." It is belief that God creates
    through the evolutionary process, and thus is not within shouting distance of
    deism.

    > At times I believe they have crossed the line and have left
    > the Lord. I hope they do not find out too late! Moorad

            & at times "creationists" have crossed various lines & "left the Lord",
    though it is neither my business nor anyone else's to decide their ultimate fate.

    Shalom,

    George

    George L. Murphy
    http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
    "The Science-Theology Interface"



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 29 2001 - 16:38:09 EDT