This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← God, Darwin or...Both?

JHJEFFERY's Avatar Jump to comment 21 by JHJEFFERY

"It seems to me Hugh Ross has constructed a model that explains both biblical theology and scientific discovery in a cohesive manner that seems philosophically sound, scientifically accurate and theologically orthodox."

This may come as a shock to you, but I have a copy of Origins of Life sitting on my coffee table. I have read, I regret, large portions of it. To say that it makes no sense damns it with faint praise. It is pathologically stupid, I mean stupid beyond bilief. Your simplistic understanding of the theory of evolution coincides with that of Ross, but that does not make it intelligible. The book displays a complete lack of understanding of evolutionary theory on the first page, where Ross contends that since evolution fails at a theory of abiogenesis, it must be discarded. Evolution is not a theory of abiogenesis--and I have followed Ross enough to know that he knows this. His pathetic attempt to make science and Genesis congruent is just that: pathetic. That makes his assertion not "wrong," but a damned lie. Ross has lied his way into a lot of money this way and I find that, and him, disgusting.

His "model" is not a model at all. He merely says that the Bible is truth and we must bend science to fit it. If you think that approach is intelligent, you are definitely on the wrong site.

BTW, you are on the wrong site anyway--this is the old site. Try posting something about Ross on the new site and the conversation will begin.

Sun, 09 Dec 2012 00:45:51 UTC | #951285