Re: Literature reform

Stephen Jones (sjones@iinet.com.au)
Wed, 23 Aug 95 06:39:27 EDT

Loren

On Fri, 18 Aug 1995 16:33:55 -0500 (EST) you wrote:

LH>ABSTRACT: David's questions about purpose, intent, and design in
>macroevolution are discussed.
>
LH>When I ask that Progressive Creationist literature START by
rejecting the
>"if-macroevolution-then-no-Creator" hypothesis (rather than implying
>its truth by jumping straight to an attack on macroevlution), I guess
>I'm ALSO looking for an acknowledgement that (most) Christians who
>accept macroevolution have have indeed carefully answered these
>issues to their satisfaction, and their faith and belief in a loving
>Creator, Designer,

I agree that proving a naturalistic mechanism for macro-evolution
would not necessarily prove that their was no creator. Many
Christians once thought that micro-evolution would overthrow the
doctrine of creation, but now even YEC accept it (indeed as Glenn's
recent Flood posts indicate, they accept it with a vengeance!).

My sole point here is that there is as yet no really plausible
naturalistic mechanism for macro-evolution, and indeed it seems to my
poor layman's understanding that the evidence as it rolls in (eg.
Acanthostega developing legs millions of years before it needed them),
seems to leave plenty of room for a Creator to have intervened
directly in the process at strategic points.

God bless.

Stephen