On Sat, 10 Jul 1999 12:24:42 EDT, "Anna L. Abrante" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>He's just a very
>intelligent man that sees the overwhelming evidence in favor of evolution,
>but maintains his belief in god, even without overwhelming evidence.

How can you possibly know what evidence someone else has?

>I recognize that people will have their beliefs. And the more they believe
>the harder it is to get them to see different. This applies no matter what
>side one might be on.  My question simply is this... If man is looking at
>an evolutionary diet to best suit his needs, why is he conferring with a
>neolithic god? And if you believe that the word of god is *IT* for all
>eternity
>,,then why go to a paleo diet at all? Hasn't it been replaced by the most
>recent perfect entity?
>
> Surely the *latest*  thing god said must be the *most* perfect for us....
>
>No?
>
>(Keeping in mind that god's word changes every few thousand years, at
>least in scrupture. In reality it changes with the whim of the society or
>leader of the time.  Nowadays it can change daily.)

I don't have the several hours to refute this in detail, other than to say that
it is one of the most ignorant series of statements I've read in a long time.


--
Cheers,

Ken                         <*>
[log in to unmask]