RE: [asa] What Does ID Add?

 
Michael,
 
For the record, again, I will say nothing more about fraud or matters of
that sort in the way you pose the issues. Ad-hominem is a style to be
shunned is it not?
 
There is law and there is grace. Shall we as a matter of general principle
err on the side of grace perhaps? There is fine precedent for that: "Let him
that is without sin cast the first stone." You know the context.
 
You choose to judge and declare publicly that I condone lying. You are of
course free to make whatever deductions you please: I am not troubled either
way. Those deductions of yours are largely speculative and may, or may not,
have anything to do with my actual position. Silence does not automatically
mean consent.
 
I rather think Michael that you ought by now to know very well what is meant
by 'Darwinism'. So far as I know, having been involved with the subject for
about fifty years, I have no private interpretation of that well used term.
Don't others seem to have understood my question?
 
Peter
 
 
  _____

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Michael Roberts
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 1:29 PM
To: Peter Loose; 'David Opderbeck'; 'AmericanScientificAffiliation'
Subject: Re: [asa] What Does ID Add?
 
Peter
 
Before you pose more questions please consider the accusations of fraud in
connection with the Peppered Moth I highlighted.
 
It is clear that you do not wish to consider them and thus you are condoning
lying. How do you reconcile this with your claim to be a Christian?
 
As for your question it can be easily answered. Who are the Christians
identified strongly with Darwinism? I can't name any, except those possibly
in the sea of Faith group - who don't understand Darwin anyway.
 
Also what do you mean by Darwinism?
 
Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Loose <mailto:peterwloose@compuserve.com>
To: 'David <mailto:dopderbeck@gmail.com> Opderbeck' ;
'AmericanScientificAffiliation' <mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 9:09 AM
Subject: RE: [asa] What Does ID Add?
 
 
David:
 
May I pose the same form of question as you concluded with?
 
"Why is it seemingly important for many Christians to identify strongly with
Darwinism?"
 
This is looking for much more than one-liner quick quips.
 
Thank you
 
Peter
 
 
 
 
 

  _____

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of David Opderbeck
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 1:23 AM
To: AmericanScientificAffiliation
Subject: [asa] What Does ID Add?
 
I'd particularly like to hear from folks who are sympathetic to ID and OEC
-- what do you think ID adds with respect to relating science, faith and
scripture?
 
As I read materials from OEC's who are sympathetic to ID and hesitant or
antagonistic about TE, I often feel a sort of disconnect. When discussing
the age of the earth, OEC's mention all sorts of things about God revealing
himself through nature as well as through scripture, doing our best to take
all of God's revelation together, not interpreting scripture in ways that
seem to clearly contradict well established scientific findings, and so on.
And yet, when the same folks talk about evolution and ID, the discussion
seems to change entirely -- now the discussion on the scientific side is all
about questioning the assumptions of science, scientism, and so forth.
 
I'm trying to understand why so many OEC's find it so important to critique
"macro"evolution in this fashion. As far as I'm concerned, the most vexing
problems with a TE position -- death before the fall, theodicy, who / what /
when was Adam, the fall, original sin, what / when was the flood, what is
the present "groaning" of creation, how will creation be renewed or
"restored" in the eschaton -- are equally difficult whether one is an OEC or
a TE. So why is "macro"evolution such a dividing line for most OEC's?
 
Two things come to my mind: (1) ID might help support certain concordist
"day-age" views that require sudden developmental jumps in kinds of animals;
and (2) ID might serve as a useful apologetic device against folks who think
evolution gets rid of God. Is there anything else? Particularly for OEC's
who are open to "framework" and other understandings of Genesis 1 and 2, is
the potential apologetic value of ID worth the candle of the divide between
OEC-ID and TE?
 
Note -- I'm not asking for critiques of the vaucousness or non-vaucousness
of ID. I'm more interested in a question of identity -- why is it seemingly
important for many OEC's to identify strongly with ID?
 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.9/994 - Release Date: 07/09/2007
16:40

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.10/995 - Release Date: 08/09/2007
13:24

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Sep 9 16:49:22 2007