Re: OT: Creationism vs. Evolution wasRe: OT: re: Somebody Buy this Chick a Clue

In article
<e4d37363-f4b8-47cd-b7e8-263e5ac46a97@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
jasoninreno82@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Sep 14, 2:29 pm, "John A. Weeks III" <j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <g0vqc4tlinp8vfu6ufl8pgth64eg9ud...@xxxxxxx>,
Clark F Morris <cfmpub...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 08:11:05 -0400, John Lansford
<jlnsf...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

much snipped

She's on record that creationism should be taught in schools as a
subject for debate. She used the same code phrases that the far right
uses when they want it taught at the same level (i.e., a "theory") as
evolution.

I believe that both theories that Creation is the answer and that
evolution can explain life here on Earth have logical problems. I
also believe that if the Universe was created and if the life on Earth
was created, that it does not necessarily follow that:

1. The creator is omnipotent.

2. The creator is omniscient.

3. The creator is benevolent.

While I choose to believe these things as a member of a Baptist
church, I have to admit that based on the evidence in the world around
me all three assertions have much evidence to contradict them.

If the creator is God, by definition, it must be omnipotent,
omniscient, and omnibenevolent.

Wrong.

You cannot get away with simply saying "wrong" when you are going
against 2000 years of philosophy and logic. You at least have to
elaborate a bit, make an argument, or cite something when you go
against such a core mainstream belief.

-john-

--
======================================================================
John A. Weeks III           612-720-2854            john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Newave Communications                         http://www.johnweeks.com
======================================================================
.

Quantcast