Re: [asa] discussion of concordism essay

>>> "Freeman, Louise Margaret" <lfreeman@mbc.edu> 09/13/06 1:16 PM
>>> >>>asks:

What's the basis for the statement that several leading ID advocates are
"probably" concordists?

Ted replies:
Personal knowledge of their own views relative to the Bible and science.
I'm not going to spell this out further, but inquiring minds can
discover
some of those views from information available on the internet or in
publications related to ID. Officially, yes, ID avoids making
statements
about the Bible; but individual IDs will do this from time to time.

In addition to what can be gathered publicly, I know (in some case quite
well) many leading IDs, and I know what many of them think on this
issue.
It's hardly a uniform position, of course--some IDs are well known to
be YEC
(Paul Nelson and John Mark Reynolds are the most obvious examples)
and some
are well known to be TEs (Mike Behe and Robin Collins fit this category
nicely). And some (here I'll leave out the names, since I am not
aware of
public statements to this effect) claim an agnostic position relative to
YEC/OED/TE, as much as I find it difficult myself to accept it at face
value. IMO, however, either a significant minority or (more likely) a
majority of IDs would, if they had to say so in a court of law, adopt
an OEC
position.

Paul Nelson, who undoubtedly knows more than I do about the views of
individual IDs, adds support to this conclusion. See his essay "Life
in the
Big Tent" (http://www.equip.org/free/DL303.htm).

One reason why many IDs are reluctant to speak about this directly
is, that
it contravenes their political goals to do so. That is, it isn't
likely to
enlarge the "big tent."

Ted

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Sep 13 16:26:06 2006