Biblical Creationism

"In our discussion of the Absolute, we have seen that as First Cause of the relative, it is orginative and creative of the relative realm.And at this point it is meet that we consider judgements about creation, or the orgination of the universe.To the extent that creation is, in at least some minimal sense, a "happening", our judgements reagardng it are "emprical" in the sense tht they are presumed to be descriptive of a state of affairs whcih obtained at a determinte time. And yet from the methodological standpoint, they are scarely "empirical" in the sense that they are emneable ot observational adjudication; we are in no potion at present to "observe" the creative occurrence and thereby confirm our judgments about its character.These considerations do not suffice to still man's inquiries and curiosities ABOUT the creative occurrence. They do, however, impose limitations as to what can be said and with what reliability."I feel that this boundary is what seperates creation science and scientific creationism AS A REAL DISCIPLINE OF THOUGHT with reliability falling to Biblical Creationism. We may be able to make the decision on another planent with "other" life but then the immediate text prior seems to apply,"The essential atomicity of the material, relative universe is, apart from these considerations, an internal consequence of the Duality of the Cosmos. Necessarily, then, the relative world, the material universe, is atomic, since in virtue of the Duality of the Absolute & the Relative, the realtive realm must be the counterpart, the opposite of the Absolute; and since the relative must be finite and characterized by basic multiplicty; that is atomic."These quotes are from Franklin J. Matchette OULINE OF A METAPHYSICS 1949. This region need not be restricted to Earth however.

You may be interested to think thru the part that may apply directly to the General's thread head to which I now quote Matchette a little more fully :"We have already suggested the specifically ethical sense of this situation- we know consider it in greater detail-" Ethics and morality rest on a fundametnal dualism of good and evil. The problem has always been one of giving a specified sense to these crucial terms; to make clear what is, no doubt, the oldest and most fundamental of man's intuitions;-the opposing characthers of good and evil.The problem A-R theory has its own distinctive answer; its own particular specification of the meaning of this basic opposition.As we have already noted, it is the Absolute which constitutes the locus of all values, in an absolute sense, as well as the point of reference from which all morality may be scanned. Within the region...there we saw the most negative thought, the most divergent mental state giving rise to a return to the Absolute; and the most postitive, least divergent mind-state giving rise to conditions of a GREATER divergence...in this sense, it is evident that no relative entity can in any real, complete way, be good -nor, by the same token, can the relative be wholly bad, since its privation, its negation of the Absolute is also never complete - utter and complete evil would be non-existent."Pages 90 and 91 of the OUTLINE OF METAPHYSICS. I will provide the full quotes of Matchette's book if you do not have it available but the simple notion of black and white representing opposites DOES NOT apply to good and evil in letting the force be with Mathette.

The explantory and interpretive theoretical backings would not be as mixed up. I expand and explain later.