Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: notesfiles
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!bellcore!decvax!genrad!grkermi!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpfcms!bill
From: bill@hpfcms.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Re: "Just the facts, please."
Message-ID: <45200013@hpfcms.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 16-Jun-85 20:12:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: hpfcms.45200013
Posted: Sun Jun 16 20:12:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Jun-85 03:25:26 EDT
References: <615@digi-g.UUCP>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard - Fort Collins, CO
Lines: 25
Nf-ID: #R:digi-g:-61500:hpfcms:45200013:37777777600:1271
Nf-From: hpfcms!bill    Jun  5 16:12:00 1985

>    Good ol' Ken "white noise" Arndt seems to be having a hard time convincing
>people that religious assertions about life/the universe/everything have as
>much (or more) validity than scientific assertions.  Perhaps it's because
>science (eventually) reaches a consensus on things (like the earth being
>round, orbiting the sun instead of vice-versa, etc) while religions don't.

Perhaps various religious groups appear to be wavering all the time, but the
Bible is firm, and has never been disproven by science.  If a particular
religion doesn't take a stand on things, it's the fault of people, not God.

>    I suppose you think Galileo was wrong, hey Ken?  I mean, he was contra-
>dicting the church's view that the sun went around the earth, and their view
>is at least equally valid, right?  Want to bring back the phlogiston theory of
>heat while your at it?  Go have your brain re-blocked.
>
>Merlyn Leroy

Again, the fault of people, not God.  By the way, the church was not alone
in supporting the "sun around the earth" theory.  That theory had GREAT
backing from the scientific community.

Don't confuse blind following of an organization (church) with faith in God.
One is prone to gross errors, because of its human makeup - the other isn't.

Bill Gates