Articles on past

Press, 12 June 1986, Page 20

Articles on past

Sir,—Arthur May (June 7) may be surprised to learn that many people are aware of the planet’s age and of evolutionary life processes. Many are also aware that the Old Testament can not be taken literally. That does not necessarily banish “god” from the universe. There is something eternal in the universe, whether it be energy mass or mind. If it is easier to accept matter as an eternal substance, that is the prerogative of the atheist; others accept mind as a more viable alternative. There are certainly ingenious creative forces at work in nature which can not be easily explained or dismissed. If there is mind behind it all then we must accept a god or gods which implies there is a goal. If there is no mind behind it all, then we are all participants in a most pointless exercise which warrants the cliche, God help us all. — Yours, J. SHARP. June 10, 1986.

Sir,—Arthur May’s credulity is remarkable (June 8). It would be easier to accept creation. The anthropologists referred to have yet to explain how such a complicated creature as man just “happened.” Assume all the right atoms in the body joined together in just the right places at

the rate of diie a second — there would be insufficient time in the estimated age of the universe for man to evolve. Ordinary mortals are on safe ground when they reason that plan pre-supposes a mind, design a designer, government a governor, and creation a creator. Even the computer comes up with a logical answer to this question: “Given only time, chance, and undirected matter, what is the possibility of life on Earth?” The answer: zero. God made man perfect. The “destructiveness” referred to results from his fall — a freewill choice. That he is “beloved” is seen from the price paid by God for his redemption. — Yours, etc., H. G. ORAM. June 10, 1986.