RE: [asa] Brilliant article by Dawkins

Is there a difference between a scientific and a historical fact? When are they the same and when different?

Moorad
________________________________
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Jack [drsyme@verizon.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 6:33 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Brilliant article by Dawkins

I dont know about it being brilliant. He spends a lot of time talking about how evolution isnt a "theory" its a fact, when we all know that the word theory has more meanings than the sense that he is using it.

I also bristle a bit at his suggestions on what preachers should preach about. This is disingenuous isnt it? What he really wants is for there to be no church, no preachers, and no religion. Perhaps he wants the preachers to say that the existence of Adam and Eve isnt factual just to create dissension, not to spread truth. Since evolution does not necessarily negate the historicity of Adam he is straying to far from his area of expertise here.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Roberts<mailto:michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
To: christians_in_science@yahoogroups.com<mailto:christians_in_science@yahoogroups.com> ; asa@calvin.edu<mailto:asa@calvin.edu> ; acg@list.dordt.edu<mailto:acg@list.dordt.edu>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 3:04 PM
Subject: [asa] Brilliant article by Dawkins

No, I am not joking. There was an absolutely brilliant article in The Times today on the menace of creationism. Excellent stuff, not one attack on Christianity. It does have a few necessary comments on bishops and clergy put in an understatement.

Ii is on http://tinyurl.com/nhgu7m

Michael

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Aug 25 11:24:53 2009