Lance wrote: > You critiqued the course outline by Victor Shepherd > as to its inordinant 'theological' focus. Are you aware > that the majority of practicing scientists who are > themselves Christians hold to some form of evolution.? > Do you?
I am aware of that. I am a creationist, and probably primarily for that reason am not currently a practicing scientist. They don't give out Ph.D.'s to anyone you know, and my creationist views caused my Ph.D. committee to split right down the middle, with one professor saying that my answer to that particular question on my Ph.D. written exams was the best he had ever read, and another professor saying that it was the worst answer on the entire exam. Strangely, the most vocal advocates of evolution as an explanation for origins that I have ever read were from theologians. They believe in evolution more strongly than most scientists. They just don't realize it. Most scientists simply operate from the currently accepted paradigm of evolution, as per the Kuhnian concept considered in Victor's course outline. I think evolutionary theory accounts for much post-creation biological events, but I do not believe that it adequately explains the origin of life, nor does it explain the diversity of life from a single celled original organism to what we observe today. I believe that the earth itself is very old, but that the creation of life was done thousands of years ago (not millions of years) as per the outline given to us in Genesis 1. I believe that Genesis 2 is an inside look of the blueprint of God, the wisdom of God, the architect's plan that gives us the why's and wherefore's. David M. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
