Re: [asa] Theological Naturalism - 'The Nature of God' = Naturalism

On Jul 24, 2007, at 8:59 PM, Gregory Arago wrote:
>
>
> "If the designer is deliberately not defined then what use is it
> for apologetics?" - Rich
>
> It is good for raising questions about the origins and processes of
> life, about the source of human consciousness, about complexity and
> simplicity and what concepts like information and mind and reverse
> engineering might mean, and about actually being a scientifically-
> minded person and also a Christian. There's a PhD in the USofA
> doing a dissertation on the IDM that I just heard about yesterday;
> these things are indeed provoking discussion not just excuses for
> rigorous thinking! The fact that a majority of IDists are OEC,
> accept common descent and some aspects of evolutionary theories is
> even fun to watch!
>

Raising questions isn't good enough. The kinds of answers that comes
out of IDM undermines the apologetics stance. Even the good parts,
e.g. fine tuning and human consciousness, get tainted because of the
opposition to "Darwinism". Instead of having a big tent that includes
ECs that are evangelicals, the IDM has a big tent that includes anti-
Darwinists that are Moonies. Furthermore, the lack of being
forthcoming about that we really are trying to prove the Christian
God only makes us look dishonest. Since we (ECs and IDMs) share the
same desire to advance the Gospel, it is important for ECs as
Christians to oppose any movement even by friends that make
Christians look dishonest and stupid and by extension scandalize the
faith once delivered to the saints.

Rich Blinne
ASA Member

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Jul 24 23:36:42 2007