tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931579729864611467.post1824041020239377016..comments2023-10-31T05:37:16.659-07:00Comments on A Guy in the Pew: Strengths and Weakness and EvolutionChuck Blanchardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01417638725063186710noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931579729864611467.post-91753989703199650872008-06-18T08:37:00.000-07:002008-06-18T08:37:00.000-07:00Seems to be a little cognitive dissonance between ...Seems to be a little cognitive dissonance between the notion that Genesis is myth and the notion that the Bible is the word of God: I can see why "all or nothing" believers have to treat evolution as an attack on their belief system. If Genesis is myth, why not the entire Bible? And if Genesis is an explanatory myth, leavened with human experience, and not a literal transcript from God, why not approach the rest of the Bible from the same perspective? <BR/><BR/>The proper question is not whether Genesis could be consistent with the scientific hypotheses that explain the mechanisnm of evolution, it's whether the creation concept is needed to explain anything.<BR/><BR/>Explaining the world by interposing the literal acts of a "creator" at every stage of the process is not fundamentally different than saying "Shazam!"<BR/><BR/>On a broader note, let's take up a scattered collection of facts and see what we get:<BR/><BR/>- Governor requires mandatory use of a controversialized (sexually transmitted) vaccine (HPV)<BR/><BR/>- An executive agency (CPS) raids a Christian religious group, fails to demonstrate evidence in support and provokes widespread sympathy for polygamists and outrage over CPS actions<BR/><BR/>- Governor's textbook takeover<BR/><BR/>Just a theory, but does anyone else believe these might be manifestations of intelligent design? <BR/><BR/>One that is intended to strip the state of its powers by using them?Georgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04197799007841743117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931579729864611467.post-75844331987035668292008-06-09T16:32:00.000-07:002008-06-09T16:32:00.000-07:00The author of the article you referenced said, "th...The author of the article you referenced said, "the truth of macroevolution is not assumed a priori in this discussion." He lied. The author certainly did presuppose macroevolution to be true before he ever wrote a single word. <BR/><BR/>Question for you: Is there a way to view Genesis as history and make it compatible with evolution.<BR/>I think all of the "theistic evolutionists" that I have talked to hold the belief that Genesis is myth and not history.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931579729864611467.post-38029463865010194562008-06-09T09:44:00.000-07:002008-06-09T09:44:00.000-07:00Curtis:The only controversy is coming from those, ...Curtis:<BR/><BR/>The only controversy is coming from those, like you, who have religious objections to evolution. There is no scientific controversy. Macro-evolution is well documented as you can see from this article <A HREF="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/" REL="nofollow">here</A>.Chuck Blanchardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01417638725063186710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931579729864611467.post-10887818458738763202008-06-09T09:38:00.000-07:002008-06-09T09:38:00.000-07:00"evolution is a well-documented and easily observe..."evolution is a well-documented and easily observed phenomenon."<BR/><BR/>Not true. The fact is, no one in history has ever observed, or documented, macro evolution. If it was an observable scientific fact there would be little or no disagreement with the theory.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com