Pim wrote:
>It seems you are confusingf science "random mutations and natural selection"
>with atheism. However random mutations and natural selection are not
inherently
>atheist beliefs. Actually in my interpretation of religion I consider
Christianity
>very compatible with the reality of science. That God used natural methods
to >createhardly undermines my faith. So your suggestion that this is somehow
>forcing atheism is based on severely flawed logic.
>Pim
Hi Pim,
Are you saying you are a devout theist who believes "God" used "random
mutation and natural selection" to create nature's diversity? Are you
committed to any particular brand of theism? Christianity, Baptist, Greek
Orthodox, Moslem, etc.,? I have no objections to, or arguments against,
anyone's philosophical beliefs. I'm merely curious, and would like to
understand more about your religion. I hadn't before met anyone passionately
defending "random mutation and natural selection" who wasn't an atheist, and
am truly eager to understand such a viewpoint. (Understanding each others
view points is the most we can hope for in these discussions. I doubt
anyone's beliefs are ever changed.)
While I am grateful to many religious people for pointing out the flaws
inherent in "random mutation and natural selection", as an agnostic, my
objection to the theory was never religious. I consider it obviously flawed
science-- silly, simplistic and unsupported by the evidence. If I did
believe in a god, it would be one capable of thinking up something better
than such a crude mechanism as "random mutation and natural selection".
Even I could do better than that, and I am far from god-like.
Bertvan