>>> Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca> 11/29/06 10:54 AM >>>asks,
This argument can be solved rather quickly and simply by Ted answering one question: what is an example of something that doesn't evolve (into being or having become)? This is not an epistemological question about what the 'theory of evolution' explains, but an ontological question about what really perhaps *doesn’t evolve* after all. After receiving an answer to this question by Ted, I will let the long conversation rest and then perhaps we can return to more civilized dialogue.
Ted replies:
OK, I'll bite. God does not evolve, in my theological understanding: God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. In saying this, I want to leave open the real possibility that God's present knowledge is not as complete as God's knowledge will be in (say) another 1 billion years--that is, I want to leave open (neither endorse nor deny) the possibility of "open theism," about which I am not fully decided. If the God of open theism would constitute something that evolves, then my answer might be the empty set, but I'm not seeing that as a necessary implication of the wording of your question.
ted
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 29 12:39:14 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Nov 29 2006 - 12:39:14 EST