|
|
USER COMMENTS BY ETHAN V. JONES |
|
|
| RECENTLY-COMMENTED SERMONS | More | Last Post | Total |
· Page 1 · Found: 5 user comments posted recently. |
|
|
12/19/07 8:05 PM |
Ethan V. Jones | | Canada | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Diana Ross wrote: Ethan - good to see you back on the forums! Ethan Jones you've been gone too long. Hi Frank! Thank you for your friendly hello, although in all honesty I don't believe we've met before. |
|
|
4/15/07 8:54 PM |
Ethan V. Jones | | Canada | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Bravo,Earlier you stated that if you had sufficient space you would explain how you reconcile the theory of evolution with the doctrine of Scripture. You may not be able to do that in one post, but - and only if you are willing to do this, of course - perhaps you can explain it in a series of posts, i.e. Part 1, 2, 3, etc. Even though we may not agree on everything, I'm impressed with the way you've conducted yourself on this thread. You've managed to maintain your composure where most would resort to banal, crude pedantry. As for everyone else, I've two questions: first, what are the qualifications for being a Christian? If there is more than merely trusting in Christ for salvation, what would that be? Secondly, how many of you have the scientific background Bravo has in order to speak authoritatively on the subject at hand? When he's talking about genes and chromosomes, do you really understand what he's saying? I'll leave it at that for now. |
|
|
4/13/07 10:40 PM |
Ethan V. Jones | | Canada | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Certainly this is a touchy issue. Bravo elucidates himself quite well and raises cogent points. Science, properly defined, is as he says it is. Upon making a few observations, one proceeds to synthesize them into a coherent framework through a hypothesis. Through experimentation he attempts to legitimize his prediction and from the results concludes whether he is correct or not. If so, (and his results are repeatable) he has a working theory. If not, it's back to the drawing board. That, in a nutshell, is science.While I don't claim to have exhaustive knowledge about the subject, evolution - at least for now - appears to best explain what's been observed. However, science is in and of itself an open-ended discipline. New facts will be discovered in the future that may falsify the entire theory altogether (and for evolution to be scientific, it must be falsifiable). I also agree with others on this board that there are philosophical problems with holding both the Darwinian theory of evolution and Scripture in equal esteem. I am curious about how you (Bravo) reconcile the two positions. I have tried to do this in the past and it seems to amount to mental gymnastics. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|