RE: Science verifies religion and love

From: Glenn Morton (
Date: Sat Jul 06 2002 - 15:11:36 EDT

  • Next message: Glenn Morton: "RE: first fully terrestrial amphibian"

    Hi Burgy,
    You wrote Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 1:59 PM:

    >Glenn clarified his position (for me) immensely, when he wrote: "But if a
    >religious document claims God did something which would leave observational
    >evidence, we most assuredly can look for that data. Doesn't prove God did
    >it, I agree, but it is consistent
    >with that statement."
    >I think that is a fair claim. I agree with it.
    >On the basis of that claim I claim that the flood of Noah's time was either
    >very local or non-existent -- a myth, for the observational evidences a
    >global flood would necessarily leave are not found, and observational
    >evidences which are consistent with a 4BY earth and inconsistent with a
    >global flood are abundant.

    And this is exactly why the flood has been a central area of concern for me.
    It should have left some observational evidence, and I won't believe in
    non-historical myths.
    >On the basis of science I don't know as I can go any further than that.
    >Similar statements can be made about much of Gen 1-11 as well as later OT
    >Now if one is persuaded that one MUST not hold to the myth concept, it
    >appears that he next begins to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to
    >rationalize scripture. This is not wrong to do of course, but for me at
    >least it never appeared particularly productive. I do not need
    >(although I'd
    >be glad to see) additional correspondences between OT history and objective
    >measurements. I greatly doubt that the uncovering of any more is going to
    >change the minds of those not honestly seeking the Christ.

    As I have said many times, this area is NOT , repeat NOT, about winning
    people to Christ. That is the ICR view and it is false. The issue is about
    not LOSING people to the faith!!!! That is an entirely different
    perspective. I know lots and lots of geoscientists who have become atheist
    or at least not-religious because of this issue. IT boils down to the
    question I often ask, 'why should we believe that which is totally false?'

      Perhaps the
    >finding of such evidences will help bolster the faith of some folks, but to
    >what advantage? Will they, as a result, suddenly become better followers of
    >JC? Will they find more compassion for the oppressed? Will they do
    >more than
    >before to salve the wounds of a hurting world?

    They might remain in the faith rather than rejecting it. We lose a lot of
    the smartest people to the secular world because they don't want to beleive
    that which is false.


    for lots of creation/evolution information
    personal stories of struggle

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 06 2002 - 13:00:01 EDT