Re: [asa] More (or less) on the term "TE"

Many years ago I was assisting in leading a course on the Young Darwin in Shrewsbury. All on the course were celebrating 40 years from graduation in biology and did the course to learn more of their hero. I arrived at the end of the first day and was introduced as a vicar. Their faces fell! One asked me what I believed as he suspected I might be a creationist.

So I replied "I am a biblical and scientific creationist" and that was a totally truthful answer.

Michael
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Gregory Arago
  To: Douglas Hayworth ; asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 12:27 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] More (or less) on the term "TE"

        Hi Doug,

        You chimed in:
        "When a fellow Christian who hears that I accept evolution asks, "So, what sort of evolutionist are you?" I reply, "I am a theistic evolutionist."

        When a fellow scientist who hears that I am a Christian, asks, "So, what sort of creationist are you?" I reply, "I am an evolutionary creationist."

        ~
        Let me pose to you alternatives.

        When a fellow Christian who hears that you accept evolution asks, "So, what sort of evolutionist are you?" Why not reply, "I am a theist/believer/religious person/Christian/Muslim, etc. who accepts the scientific theory of biological evolution"?

        There is instead absolutely NO need to call yourself a TE as this is just confusing, as you have kindly indicated by speaking of people 'trying out alternatives.' Why not make TE less rather than more?

        When a fellow scientist who hears that you are a Christian, asks, "So, what sort of creationist are you?" Why not reply, "I am a scientist who accepts the value and meaning of the terms 'creation,' 'creativity' and the verb 'to create' and who thinks these terms are helpful in understanding the universe that we live in. The Bible (in English) contains the words, "In the beginning God created..." I don't disqualify the word 'creation' from science as Richard Dawkins does. If you want to call me a 'creationist' (perjoratively) because it is a weapon for you to use in a culture war against 'religious thought' then that is your prerogative. But I am both a scientist and a religious person at the same time without conflict. My university degrees in science are not simply worthless or hypocritical because I believe in God."

        Cheers,
        Gregory

        --- On Mon, 1/26/09, Douglas Hayworth <haythere.doug@gmail.com> wrote:

          From: Douglas Hayworth <haythere.doug@gmail.com>
          Subject: [asa] More on the term "TE"
          To: asa@calvin.edu
          Received: Monday, January 26, 2009, 1:14 AM

OK, I've got to chime in about the merits of the label "theistic
evolution". (I know it's been batted about in a few threads lately).
Until about ten years ago, the term simply referred to the acceptance
of the compatibility of belief in a personal God with evolution as the
correct scientific description of natural history. I don't think the
general meaning was ever confusing until opponents of evolution began
using it as a derogatory term (I remember Philip Johnson calling it an
oxymoron). Now everyone (including myself) is second-guessing the term
because its plain sense has been abused and nit-picked to death.
Francis Collins, Denis Lamoureux, Keith Miller and just about everyone
of us is trying out alternatives. It's just a matter of time until
people mess up the practical use of the new terms, too.

We ought to use terminology in a manner consistent with what the
proponents of the particular view accept. If most people who
originally accepted the label "theistic evolutionist" are Christians
who believe in the personal God and Christ of the bible, then the term
should not be mischaracterized as meaning some sort of deistic form of
belief.

I think the term is still useful in context. It is the easiest answer
to a specific kind of question:

When a fellow Christian who hears that I accept evolution asks, "So,
what sort of evolutionist are you?"
I reply, "I am a theistic evolutionist."

When a fellow scientist who hears that I am a Christian, asks, "So,
what sort of creationist are you?"
I reply, "I am an evolutionary creationist."

In each cases, my answer addresses the primary concern of the
questioner. Many other descriptors and theological terms will be
needed and useful in any follow-up discussion that results, but
accepting these simple labels is still meaningful. Most laypeople,
after all, will have no idea what biologos or continuous creation
mean. And how do you turn those terms into a descriptor of what you
are? Describing yourself as a "biologosist" or a "continuous
creationist" really isn't going help people understand your basic
point of view.

Doug Hayworth

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now!

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jan 26 07:50:40 2009