Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: mib@churchy.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: a prayer for the dying Message-ID: Date: 27 May 91 22:46:22 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Free Software Foundation, Cambridge, MA Lines: 33 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article trondst@mack.uit.no (Trond S. Trondsen) writes: The last thing I want to do is debate talk.origins topics on this group, but the moderator has said that the theological implications are relevant here. This is the same proud mind speaking that has no problem accepting that God created the universe, but has a VERY hard time indeed accepting that He was capable of doing it in 144 hours (6 days). (Our proud scientific mind calls God a liar, 'we know better'). Not at all. I don't believe that God created the world in six days, but I don't believe that he's claimed he did either. I don't believe God can't, I just don't think he did. Why is it that you constrain God so? I'm quite aware that God could have created the world any way he wanted, but why don't you think so? Naturally, this question also borders on biblical literalism. Why don't you think God can save people through an imperfect book? Why don't you think God can successfully interact with humanity through fallible humans making fallible statements? Worshipping a God which we limits to fit comfortably in our mind and in between our intellectual knowledge (e.g. 'God did it trough Evolution! Yeah, I'm comfortable with that. Yeah, it fits. YO!') is no better than carving him out in wood and bow down before'im. It seems to me that you have defined perfection in a way not sanctioned by the Bible, and then you constrain God to your model. I start my observation of the universe without presumptions of what God deems best and then learn about his majesty. -mib