Dave raises some interesting points. I would like to comment on one of them.
----- Original Message -----
From: <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 5:05 PM
> There is, hoiwever, a more basic problem with the analogy, namely, that
> the motion is determined by chance. Whether this is connected to a
> pseudo-random or truly random number generator, it does not represent
> personal choice
It can be due to personal choice. Lets replace the dot with an intelligent
agent. The dot has a choice, do the moral thing and move halfway to dot 1,
do the sinful thing and move halfway to dot 2 or do a neutral thing an move
halfway to dot 3. As with all of us in life, we do some moral things, some
bad things and some that really don't make a difference (like belching in
public). This intelligent agent will now produce a Sierpinski's gasket as
surely as the sun will rise tomorrow. So these systems actually illustrate
that God could self-limit his knowledge of which choice we will make, but
our life will still provide the pattern required to fit into his global
scheme.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 06 2000 - 20:47:41 EDT