Re: Thanks x10^6 - Process Theeology

From: John (Burgy) Burgeson (hoss_radbourne@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Apr 04 2002 - 13:34:54 EST

Next message: John (Burgy) Burgeson: "Re: Current Events"

Previous message: Shuan Rose: "RE: Creationism in the UK (Utley v Dawkins)"
Maybe in reply to: Lawrence Johnston: "Thanks x10^6 - Process Theeology"
Next in thread: Howard J. Van Till: "Re: Nature of nature (was: Current events). That God should not be God."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

>>I had learned from Burgy that it
pictured an evolving God, >>

I did not wish to make that point -- I don't think it is accurate.

Burgy

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

Next message: John (Burgy) Burgeson: "Re: Current Events"
Previous message: Shuan Rose: "RE: Creationism in the UK (Utley v Dawkins)"
Maybe in reply to: Lawrence Johnston: "Thanks x10^6 - Process Theeology"
Next in thread: Howard J. Van Till: "Re: Nature of nature (was: Current events). That God should not be God."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 04 2002 - 13:35:25 EST