Re: Assurance of faith

Evolution is more of a historical explanation than a predictive theory, as
it is based on historical rather than empirical science. Its test is whether
it explains and whether it gives retrodictions of what must have happened in
the past. It retrodicts that Precambrian fossils ought to exist and that
these will not be vertebrates and will be "simpler" than Cambrian fossils.
Evolution is also falsifiable if vertebrates are found in the Precambrian
and humans in the Mesozoic of Texas at Paluxy.

Michael

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alexanian, Moorad" <alexanian@uncw.edu>
To: <drsyme@cablespeed.com>; <pruest@mysunrise.ch>; "Samantha Gore"
<samantha.gore@btopenworld.com>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 3:35 PM
Subject: RE: Assurance of faith

> It is plain and simple. Evolutionary theory fails in its ability to make
> predictions. Predictions and not mere explanations is the essence of any
> scientific theory. One, of course, can never know the future. But
> theories created by man can make predictions and therein lies the
> failure of evolutionary theory as a scientific theory.
>
> Moorad
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
> Behalf Of drsyme@cablespeed.com
> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 10:10 AM
> To: pruest@mysunrise.ch; Samantha Gore
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: Assurance of faith
>
> Of course eschatology is "completely off limits" if you
> erroneously understand biblical eschatology as something
> that is still in the future.
>
> That is why many find biblical eschatology so hard to
> understand, because they have been taught their entire
> lives that these events are future. When you understand
> that the end time events spoken of by Jesus ocurred in
> 70AD, then everything makes perfect sense.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 06:50:35 +0100
> Peter Ruest <pruest@mail-ms.sunrise.ch> wrote:
> >
> >Samantha, you wrote: "...I'm afraid I still feel that the
> >materials here
> >focus on the creation end of the story and not the
> >eschatological end..."
> >
> >>From what you wrote before, I got the impression that
> >>assurance of faith was
> >your problem, not (theoretical) eschatology. Eschatology
> >has two aspects, a
> >practical and a theoretical one. The practical one
> >revolves around the
> >assurance of faith and the joy of our "blessed hope" for
> >our future after
> >Christ's return, based on the few clear promises
> >Scripture gives us for our
> >practical life of faith today.
> >
> >Theoretical eschatology, on the other hand, deals with
> >the question of what
> >we can know about what will happen, in what sequence,
> >etc. As biblical
> >evidence for these topics is notoriously difficult to
> >interpret, theologians
> >have come up with various different, often incompatible
> >views about this.
> >And various sects or groups have settled on particular
> >speculations, which
> >we better ignore. Jesus said (Matthew 25:13) "Therefore
> >keep watch, because
> >you do not know the day or the hour."
> >
> >As far as science is concerned, we can know and learn
> >lots of things about
> >the past, but only tentative extrapolations about the
> >future. And
> >eschatology, (teaching about the last things) is
> >completely off-limits.
> >Therefore it's quite natural that the ASA list focuses,
> >among other topics,
> >on creation, but hardly, if at all, on eschatology.
> >
> >Peter
> >
> >--
> >Dr. Peter Ruest, CH-3148 Lanzenhaeusern, Switzerland
> ><pruest@dplanet.ch> - Biochemistry - Creation and
> >evolution
> >"..the work which God created to evolve it" (Genesis 2:3)
>
>
>
Received on Fri Mar 26 04:07:48 2004