Vatican official rejects Intelligent Design

[Tony]

Silmarillion.

[WolfVanZandt]

[AllanS]

[WolfVanZandt]

[postodave]

[AllanS]

[alecto]

[WolfVanZandt]

Postodave, have you read Lewis' Miracles. He explains why a God that made a natural universe might want to modify the universe occassionally and did a good job with it.

As it is Intelligent Design doesn't discount evolution - it accepts the possibility of evolution but says that God was behind it. In fact, that seems to be Lewis' position - and even more than mine since he evidently (from reading the Problem of Pain) believed in the evoluton of Man from lower life forms. He was quite a lot more Liberal than I am.

Cause and effect doesn't clarify what happened before 6000 BC because, regardless as to whether that was the beginning of the universe, it was most certainly the beginning of history. Cause and effect doesn't help because it doesn't tell which of multiple possible causes were the actual causes for a phenomenon. You have t have empirical support for at and you don't have any empirical support available for creation unless Genesis is reliable. I think it is, therefore, I, at least, have some theoretically empirical evidence for my views. Pure evolutionists have no empirical evidence at all. They have empirical evidence to suggest mechanisms that might have explained how things came about, but they have no way of nailing down if they actually are the causes that were in effect.

[robsia]

[WolfVanZandt]

We distinguish between history and prehistory. History is the period during which events were recorded. Before that time, was prehistory (before history). Man didn't start recording events until around 6000 BC.

[robsia]

[Tony]

[WolfVanZandt]

[robsia]

[WolfVanZandt]