On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 12:46:44 -0800, "randy" <rkluth@wavecable.com> wrote: "Neil Kelsey" randy No, I meant that the problem is that you're offering an either/or proposition. Either God created the world, or "natural forces" did. I'm saying that this is not how creationists view it, as an either/or proposition. Creationists clearly accept "natural forces" as part of
On Dec 24, 9:41 am, Terry Cross <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote: On Dec 24, 8:59 am, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote: On Dec 24, 12:55 am, Terry Cross <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote: Nowhere did I say that Mother Nature exists. But I'm not sure your God You know nothing of "my god." If you don't answer for anyone's words but your own, I expect the same courtesy.
On Dec 24, 12:55 am, Terry Cross <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote: On Dec 23, 10:52 am, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote: On Dec 22, 1:48 pm, "randy" <rkl...@wavecable.com> wrote: "Neil Kelsey" randy The earth was created via natural forces. Or it was created by God. But no one would ever use the word "uncreated."
On Dec 22, 1:48 pm, "randy" <rkl...@wavecable.com> wrote: "Neil Kelsey" randy The earth was created via natural forces. Or it was created by God. But no one would ever use the word "uncreated." I'm not sure you have that right. The fabricated word "uncreated" means that something was created and then it was undone. How does that apply to the universe
