Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhuxt!mhuxi!mhuxa!houxm!ihnp4!we13!otuxa!ll1!sb1!burl!duke!unc!bch
From: bch@unc.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: God and Science
Message-ID: <5588@unc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 20-Jul-83 14:09:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: unc.5588
Posted: Wed Jul 20 14:09:10 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 22-Jul-83 04:02:02 EDT
References: <1744@mcnc.UUCP> hou5d.576
Lines: 38

Did Ken Cochran and I read the same article by Eddie Stokes?  Nowhere
in the article does Eddie say that the theory of evolution is PROVEN,
nor does he say that this proves there is no god.  In fact, to quote
directly, Eddie says:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

    "I believe that the scientific method is a gift from God to
man in order that man better understand God's universe. I also
believe that true religion MUST conform to scientific theories.
In other words, what we know about science is a pitifully small
subset of "true religion". In order to understand science fully,
we must also understand God fully, and vice-versa. It is, of
course, impossible for us to fully understand anything, since our
minds have limited capacity. Thus, it would be to our benefit
if we started from what we know (computers and evolution included)
and attempted to increase the knowledge of the human race, rather
than debating on whether or not God created the universe in 7 days
flat, since the probability of this occurance is exceedingly small."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Without accusing Ken of maliciousness and deliberately misrepresenting
Eddie's argument to suit his own purposes, I cannot see how he derived:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Surely anyone can see the falacies in this argument. Eddie Stokes's argument
boils down to:
	We have computers, cars etc .   developed through science....
	Therefore the THEORY of evolution is proved .....
	Therfore there is no God !"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
from Eddie's text.  My inference, I guess, is that Ken thinks that
anyone who believes in evolution (possibly anyone who isn't a funda-
mentalist) must be an atheist.  This wouldn't suprise me given some
of the other misapprehensions running around on this newsgroup.

				Byron Howes
				UNC - Chapel Hill