On 11/17/08, Vernon Jenkins <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net> wrote:
>
> A Creator who speaks into being a short, meaningful and fundamental sentence
> of Hebrew, manifestly, richly and uniquely endowed with structures of
> numerical geometry (based upon features of Hebrew society that were to
> appear some millenia later), is hardly likely to be prefacing a _myth_! Your
> conviction regarding these early verses of Genesis together with your belief
> that my observations are of no relevance to the origins debate are clearly
> unreasonable.
I understand that you think my views are "unreasonable." Fair enough.
I feel no compulsion to defend them to you.
>you must surely agree that they speak clearly of
> _supernatural design and intent_.
No. I perceive nothing of the sort.
>
> As an evolutionist, believing Genesis, chapters 1 to 11 to be myth, you
> cleverly side-stepped the BBD and CC (i.e. 'Birds Before Dinos' and
> 'Completed Creation') problems. But now you have to rethink your position,
1. I am not an "evolutionist." I understand evolutionary theory to be
a highly successful scientific model. Like Newton's laws and
Einstein's Relativity theories. Nothing more.
2. No, I do not have to "rethink my position," on the basis of your
current ideas. OTOH, I am alwyas "rethinking." It is who I am.
Now if you were to discover some other part of scripture, well
authenicated, or some natural phenoma that pointed to and was in
support of your thesis, that MIGHT make a difference. Absent any
consillience, however, it simply stands as an oddity. And, of course,
totally irrelevant to any YEC positions.
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 19 11:53:27 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Nov 19 2008 - 11:53:27 EST