Neil / Mark / religious content
Joel Lyons
jrlyons at bellsouth.net
Fri Apr 12 22:04:26 EDT 2002
You didn't miss a thing Stan.
Stan Gorodenski wrote:
> Thanks for the warning. I went no further and deleted all threads to
> this message.
>
> Stan
>
> Ron Gatrelle wrote:
> >
> > I changed the subject line as I think that is proper when threads go
> > outside of the original topic. Here we are way outside of it. Neil
> > introduced a religious point (creation) and it is continued here. So if
> > not interested - delete now. Also, don't complain if you go ahead and read
> > it. We will just have to agree to disagree. Neil will likely want to post
> > one more on this ( for any clarification of his personal views) and then
> > that should be it. We can state our positions but we should not argue (to
> > convince - or denigrate) on this one. I state my view - and it is mine
> > alone.
> > _______________________
> >
> > Neil, I have a couple of questions. Not trying to stirr anything up.
> > Just some expansion of your thoughts. When you said
> >
> > " _However_ the evidence from this list shows that there is often a
> > lamentable lack of logical and scientific thinking amongst certain
> > collectors. "
> >
> > Is the reason you referred only to collectors (vs. say lepsters) simply
> > because you were talking to one, or does this reflect a view that
> > "collectors" in general don't utilize "scientific thinking" while other
> > lepsters (in general) do? I think you meant the former, but it would be
> > easy for (paranoid ;-) collectors who read that and perceive that this
> > indicates an overall prejudice on your part. So please expand the thought
> > for clarification.
> >
> > You also said:
> > "You [Mark] believe in an obvious, hoax; a phony scam that seeks to
> > deprive the world of proper scientific thinking. The so called "creation
> > science". It has been _proven_ beyond the slightest glimmer of doubt to to
> > be utterly false.
> >
> > " The bible _cannot_ be litterally true as you assert. It is full of things
> > that are plainly incorrect. This doesn't invalidate its morality but it
> > _cannot_ be litterally true."
> >
> > "Mark. to be utterly frank. You may like to call yourself scientific but
> > until you drop your belief in this phony, crooked, tribal anti-science no
> > proper scientist will regard your beliefs as founded in science."
> >
> > In saying this I get the impression you don't think that anyone who agrees
> > with the Divine Creation of the Universe and/or the literalness of
> > Scripture can be a proper scientist. Is that correct? If so, then you
> > realize you call to question people like Dr. Don Lafontaine who is the Lep.
> > Soc. president, a Canadian National Collection researcher, systematist,
> > born-again, Pentecostal, Christian, and lay minister. His theology and
> > mine are virtually the same, by the way. We are both tongue talkin,
> > evangelical, fundamentalists. I don't see that our "religion" or belief in
> > the God of the world's Jews, Moslems, and Christians as The Creator has
> > anything to do with our "science" in dealing with Lepidoptera.
> >
> > If this is not what you meant to say please clarify. In emails we do not
> > always get across what we really mean or think. I would hate for you to be
> > misunderstood by those subscribed here who belong to the God-of-Abraham
> > faiths and as such are thus "creationists," and by virtue of that one
> > thing, think that you are saying they are all incapable of being "proper"
> > scientists.
> >
> > Ron Gatrelle
> >
> > PS. If that is your opinion, I will disagree, but allow you to have it
> > (not argue the point). I just want to make sure that if that is how
> > broadly you view this issue (or not) that you are correctly understood by
> > all. Now, the reason I have no problem with you holding that position is
> > that if there is no creation, just pure natural evolution, then you would
> > be totally correct. This whole tread is way off leps as it is, but I will
> > add that if there is no creation then there is no God (in the
> > Jewish/Moslem/Christian tradition) for that is the central element that
> > makes Him such in those faiths. Thus, in Christianity, anyone who does not
> > believe in God as creator can not truly be Christian. They are just
> > religiously pseudochristians. Millions of people are very good and moral
> > persons without being involved in a formal religion - so why belong to a
> > Christ Faith (God was incarnate) where there was/is no such thing? (No
> > answer wanted or needed.)
> >
> > PPS I do understand that Neil is not agaist these "religions" or the
> > people in them - just creationism and a Divine Creator as fact.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> >
> > http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
> http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
------------------------------------------------------------
For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
More information about the Leps-l
mailing list