Peairtach
Puritan Board Doctor
This is a spin off from the "Tim Keller Shocked Me!" thread, rather than the "Benny Hinn Shocked Me!" thread.
It seems much easier for conservative evangelicals and the Reformed, to dismiss the current "science" on evolution, than the current "science" on the age of the earth and cosmos.
Why is this?
The "science" on the age of the earth and cosmos must be perceived by the Reformed and conservative evangelical community to be much harder science than the science for evolution, which must be looked upon by the Reformed and conservative evangelical community as soft science bordering on butter or blancmange science (?)
Is the science for the age of the earth and cosmos really hard science, or is it butter science?
It seems much easier for conservative evangelicals and the Reformed, to dismiss the current "science" on evolution, than the current "science" on the age of the earth and cosmos.
Why is this?
The "science" on the age of the earth and cosmos must be perceived by the Reformed and conservative evangelical community to be much harder science than the science for evolution, which must be looked upon by the Reformed and conservative evangelical community as soft science bordering on butter or blancmange science (?)
Is the science for the age of the earth and cosmos really hard science, or is it butter science?