1. Why don't we suggest the same exercise for atomic theory? What would
be the outcome?
2. You may be surprised to hear this, but I could make a case against
evolutionary theory. I know the counter arguments well--both the
scientific ones and the religious ones. My guess is that they would sound
a lot like yours or Phil Johnson's or Mike Behe's, etc. And I'm squarely
in the camp of the critics of neo-Darwinism such as Gould, Goodwin, and
Kauffman. The other point is that my worldview allows both an
evolutionary possibility (i.e. a theistic, divinely governed process) or a
special creationist possibility--God certainly is able to do what the
special creationists say.
3. My question is whether you can be objective--doesn't your Adventist
theology demand a young-earth, special creationist perspective? And this
goes for all theologies that are committed to a young-earth, literalistic
interpretation of Genesis 1. I don't need to be lectured about
presuppositions, paradigms, and worldviews--I work within a theological
and a philosophical framework (Reformed, Kuyperian, C. Van Tillian) that is
well aware of these issues. But you're the one who raised the issue of
objectivity.
Perhaps I've missed the point of your post, but this is what came to mind.
TG
_____________________________________________________________
Terry M. Gray, Ph.D. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
Calvin College 3201 Burton SE Grand Rapids, MI 40546
Office: (616) 957-7187 FAX: (616) 957-6501
Email: grayt@calvin.edu http://www.calvin.edu/~grayt