----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Roberts" <topper@robertschirk.u-net.com>
To: "Joel Cannon" <jcannon@jcannon.washjeff.edu>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 10:00 PM
Subject: Re: Paley and Pascal: Was Ellen White....
> Now as Ted hasnt picked up Joel's mistakes I think I will!!!
>
> > > I for one wouldn't mind seeing further comments on this quote, as one
> who
> > > is not at all familiar with the writings of Pascal and Paley, or much
> > > else that divinity students read.<br>
> > > <br>
> >
> > > > Think of the difference it would have made to contemporary
> > > > Christianity if <br>
> > > > Darwin had read Pascal instead of Paley in his days as a divinity
> > > > student" <br>
> > > > (E.T. Oakes, 2001).<br>
> > > > *****************************<br>
> > > > Karl V. Evans
> >
> > Since George Murphy picked up Pascal and Ted Davis is either too busy
> > or hasn't read his email, I will give William Paley a quick shot. Ted
> > can correct my mistakes.
> >
> > William Paley, arguably the dominant figure in English speaking
> > Chistianity at the time of Charles Darwin, fashioned an argument from
> > design that argued that the ecology of the natural world was analagous
> > to a well-constructed clock ACTUALLY A WATCH , HIS BOOK ON NATURAL
> THEOLOGY STARTED WITH FINDING A WATCH ON A MOORLAND - OF WHICH THERE ARE
> PLENTY IN HIS ARCHDEACONARY (AREA THE SIZE OF A COUNTY); just as we look
at
> a clock and infer a
> > clockmaker, we should look at the clocklike works of the natural
> > world (how each creature is superbly crafted to fit its environment)
> > and infer the presence of a benevolent God who had crafted the
> > cheerful, precise world.
> >
> > As an example of how influential Paley was, it is my recollection that
> > when Darwin was taking his exams in Divinity school, questions on
> > William Paley's Natural Theology constituted as large (or possibly
> > larger) portion of the exam than those involving old and new
> > testaments (Desmond and Morris's biography of Darwin documents
> > this). Darwin was positively impressed by Paley. THIS HAS BEEN
UNDERMINED
> BY AILEEN FYFE IN AN UNDERGRAD THESIS AT CAMBRIDGE WHICH WAS PUBLISHED IN
> THE BRIT JOUR FOR HIST OF SCIENCE 3 YEARS AGO (SORRY NO REF AS I HAVE JUST
> MOVED TO LANCASTER AND THE JOURNAL IS IN A PACKING CASE. (SHE WAS JIM
> SECORD'S STUDENT - HE HAS JUST PUBLISHED THE WONDERFUL "VICTORIAN
> SENSATION" ON VESTIGES). IN THE 1820S AND 30S CAMBRIDGE UNDERGRADS READ
LESS
> PALEY THAN MOST CLAIM INCLUDING DESMOND AND MOORE. It affected the
> > general public also. Housewives WORKING CLASS OR UPPER CLASS? were
reputed
> to be able to name 30
> > species of lichen and liverwort and explain how those indicated a
> > benevolent God. (that recollection is from Diogenes Allen, Christian
> > Belief in a Post-modern World which has a very good section on Paley
> > and his effect). Importantly, for many people in the 1800's William
> > Paley and his natural theology was Christianity. JUST TELL ME WHO, AND I
> WILL TELL YOU THOSE WHO WERE AWARE OF HIS LIMITAITIONS INCLUDING SEDGWICK,
> CHALMERS, SUMNER AND OTHER CHRISTIAN LEADERS OF THE DAY.
> >
> >
> > This exaltation of Paley YET ANOTHER HISTORICAL MYTH, and the idea that
> Christians needed to
> > justify their belief by appeal to nature rather than by looking at
> > Jesus and God's acts in history made popular Christianity easy
> > pickings for those hostile to Christianity after Darwin. THIS IS
> CONTRADICTED BY MOST IF NOT ALL WRITERS FROM 1800 TO 1850 I HAVE READ,
THEY
> SAW PALEY AS USEFUL AS POINTING TO A CREATOR BUT NOT A REDEEMER. Darwin's
> > natural explanation for the history of life is threatening or deadly
> > to a Paley-inspired Christian NAME SOME because it removes an essential
> part of
> > their faith. Darwin's theory would undercut it in two ways, by
> > revealing the tremendous suffering and death inherent in the natural
> > world ("red in tooth and claw" was Darwin's term) which stood in stark
> > contrast to Paley's cheerful world and called into question the
> > goodness of God ACTUALLY PALEY DISCUSSED NATURE RED IN TOOTH AND CLAW AS
> DID BUCKLAND IN HIS EXCELLENT BRIDGEWATER TREATISE., and by presenting a
> mechanism by which organisms
> > could naturally be fitted like clockwork into their environment. WHY DID
> SO FEW GIVE UP THEIR FAITH BECAUSE OF DARWIN THEN, SORRY I CANT NAME ANY.
> >
> > Hence Oakes question of how it might be different if Darwin read
> > Pascal, who distrusted natural theology, instead of Paley. For a
> > Pascal-inspired Christian, who would arguably be more orthodox, VERY
> ARGUABLY
> > Darwin's theory of evolution would have been irrelevant.
> >
> > The shadow of Paley is still with us. Ironically, both Richard Dawkins
> > and the Intelligent Design people view Paley very positively NOT ID -
SEE
> MY PAPER IN PERSPECTIVES IN DEC 99, PALEY SAW GOD;S DESIGN IN EVERYTHING ,
> ID ESPECAILLY IN THE HANDS OF BEHE DOES NOT.. Dawkins
> > book, "The Blind Watchmaker" comes from Paley's watchmaker
> > argument. Dawkins, states that the argument from design is the only
> > argument that makes sense (Paley's only problem was that he was
> > wrong). Dembski, it his book, Intelligent Design, speaks positively of
> > the British natural theologians BUT DOES NOT SEE THE DIFFERENCE OF
CLASSIC
> DESIGN (OF WHICH PALEY WAS ONE EXPONENT) AND ID, of which Paley was the
most
> > prominent. In his mind, what distinguishes intelligent design from
> > Paley is that ID is empirically based NAME THE EXPERIMENT!, and that it
is
> more "modest" in
> > that it doesn't identify the designer. And according to Dembski and
> > Phillip Johnson's writings, justification of theism through nature is
> > necessary for a rationally based faith IS THAT BIBLICAL?. In my opinion
> the atheists
> > such as Richard Dawkins are still making hay out of Paley's bad
> > theology and Christians raised in the Paley tradition are still
> > ignoring the fact that it is Jesus who reveals God to us AND NATURE AS
WE
> FIND IN CLAVIN, RAY AND MANY OTHERS.
> >
> > Interestingly, the Oakes quote comes from a review of ID leader Phillip
> > Johnson's "Wedge of Truth" in First Things
> > (http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0101/reviews/oakes.html) Here
> > is the complete paragraph from which the quote came:
> >
> >
> >
> > Throughout Johnson?s book, and indeed throughout
> > all his writings on this subject, there lurks, like
> > the Ghost of Christmas Past, clanking chains and
> > all, the unexorcised spirit of the Anglican
> > Archdeacon William Paley (1743-1805), whose
> > lucubrations on the ?clockmaker God? so impressed
> > Darwin in his undergraduate days. In my opinion,
> > anyone who follows that hyper-cheerful, almost
> > Candide-like clergyman PLAIN SILLY down the designer
> road is
> > asking for trouble later on; and indeed once Darwin
> > became a naturalist (in the nineteenth-century
> > meaning of that word: an investigator and collector
> > of species), his departure from Christian orthodoxy
> > was well-nigh inevitable WHAT ABOUT ASA GRAY AND MANY
> OTHERS. (Think of the difference
> > it would have made to contemporary Christianity if
> > Darwin had read Pascal instead of Paley in his days
> > as a divinity student.)DO WE KNOW HE DID NOT, HE READ
> VARIOUS EVANGELICAL WORKS WHILE AT CAMBRIDGE AND HIS ONLY EXTANT NOTES (TO
> MY KNOWLEDGE) FROM CAMBRIDGE ARE NOTES ON THE GOSPELS - VERY ORTHODOX
> TOO!!!! (THEY ARE MISLABELLED IN THE CATALOGUE AT CAMB UNIV LIB!
>
> NOT A GOOD REVIEW FROM FIRST THINGS - VERGING ON THE SILLY.
>
> Now for Allen Roy's comments on Ron Numbers. I am sorry to say it but they
> are plain nasty and wrong. Ron is a careful and fair scholar who is
> meticulous in accuracy and seeks to describe and to explain those he
studies
> and avoids denigration. He often refrains from making negative judgements.
> Yes he no longer claims faith, but all Christians should ask why he
rejected
> the faith of his youth. when Christians are forced or "indoctrinated "(
used
> by an evangelical student critical of the YEC teaching at her church) to
> believe nonsense then it is not surprising they apostasise, especially
when
> they are harassed if they question.
> I dont who does more damage to Christianity - YECs who codemn OECs for
> heresy or the likes of Bishop Spong and other wooly liberals. a plague on
> both their houses.
>
> Michael Roberts
> >
> > **********************************************************************
> >
> > A qualification: It is my understanding that Paley and other natural
> > theologians did not, as is commonly believed, understanding that they
> > were proving the existence for God. Rather they thought they were
> > inspiring more openness to the possibility of revelation. But it
> > seems to have been perceived in this way, and it was to some, the
> > pinnacle of the expression of the idea which originated with Descartes
> > and Newton that the best way to justify Christian belief was through
> > science and philosophy rather than by appeal to Jesus.
> GROSS OVERSTATEMENT.
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> > Joel W. Cannon | (724)223-6146
> > Physics Department |
> > Washington and Jefferson College |
> > Washington, PA 15301 |
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 31 2001 - 03:23:25 EDT