Re: Evidence of God

On 1 Dec 2003 23:44:46 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Al Evan) wrote:

>
>     I am not a Biblical scholar so I can't really comment on Till's
>extensive quote from the bible-other than to comment that, his point
>that there was more than one prophet prophesying--and they prophesied
>in opposition to each other-is neither new nor very important.  What's
>Till's point?  Biblical scholars already know this.  This factoid has
>nothing to do with the uniqueness of the Bible.
>     However, I will comment on his thought process using the
>following  paragraph from Chapter 1:  "Much of what McDowell sees as
>biblical "uniqueness" is actually the result of political and social
>chance and circumstance. Christianity happened to take root and thrive
>in a geographical area that became more technologically advanced than
>other parts of the world, and it also enjoyed favored status from
>governmental institutions that suppressed opposition to it."
>
>     What are we to make of this?  Other than that, Till is a believer
>in the "Chance" method of evolution. 

Strawman.
 
>                                     Evolutionists now agree that it

No such thing as an "evolutionist" outside the paranoid fantasies of
creationists - it'stheir dishonest attempt to turn the reality into an
-ism.

>wasn't, as originally thought, strictly "Survival of the fittest", but

You're talking 150-year-old science.

>the chance survival of members of species with particular propitious
>physical attributes-like a slightly larger brain.  Also, Evolution is
>not a continuum, as was also originally thought, but it works in
>spurts with large, dry spells, between growth spurts. The world is,
>apparently, in a dry spell at the present moment.

Straw man.

>     Anyway, if Till is right, geographical areas also evolve and
>become technologically advanced. Apparently Till believes that, if the
>wind and rain blow and wash against mountains long enough they will
>eventually carve out an automobile--and not just sand.  

Deliberate lie.

>                                                       It's like the
>idea that a gadzillion monkeys, playing on typewriter keys, will
>eventually write "King Lear", only with geographical areas.

Strawman.

>     According to Till then, the people who lived in the area were
>just along for the ride.  Those Europeans didn't have a culture that
>welcomed technology and change.  How could they welcome technology and
>change?  They were Christians, and, you know, their rulers forced
>everyone to be Christian.

The last sentence is, unusually for you, true.

>     Everybody knows that the culture created  by Christianity had
>nothing to do with the supremacy of Western European concepts of
>civilization. In fact, according to Till, the Christian culture of
>Western Europe was contrary to Western European culture and
>technological advances.

There is a reason the times when the church ruled, were called the
dark ages.

>     Yeah, right!!!  So much for Farrell Till!  However, I do intend
>to read Chapter 2.  I'm sure there must be great insights to be had
>there.