Re: Kerkut

Jack Syme wrote:

>For this reason, I think that we should be supporting any of the Old
>earthers, and if Dick doesnt like Ross' view because Ross is a progessive
>creationist, and Dick is an evolutionist, well so be it. But, at least Ross
>is out there fighting with the YEC'ers trying to prove that both the Bible,
>and science can agree on an old creation.

Depends on what we perceive the problem to be. If the problem is simply:
Is the earth young or old? Well, it's old. Hugh Ross wins, Henry Morris
loses. But if the problem is: Is biological evolution true? ("True" at
least as it pertains to Homo sapiens being connected to the phyletic tree
of life.) Ross and Morris both lose. What's to chose between two
unworkable methods of apology? Does flunking your course in biology with a
68 give you bragging rights over someone who gets a 52?

For the record, I do take issue with some of the aspects of evolutionary
theory. Pure chance as a mechanism for genetic drift is a possible
explanation, but I believe we have overlooked the possible effects of
environmental impact as a causal factor whereby organisms make necessary,
adaptive, genetic modifications. But that's just me.

Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
www.genesisproclaimed.org
Received on Thu Feb 5 22:46:11 2004