Re: I'm back!

Brian D Harper (bharper@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu)
Thu, 10 Jun 1999 18:17:44 -0700

At 05:52 AM 6/11/99 +0800, Steve wrote:
>Group
>
>On Wed, 09 Jun 1999 17:31:20 -0700, Brian D Harper wrote:
>
>BH>Welome back Steve.
>
>Thanks to Brian for his welcome.
>
>BH>I'm wondering if you might clarify your position for me. I'm
>>going to delete all except the protions I have a question
>>about.
>
>[...]
>
>>SJ>Personally I would have no problem with even the most extreme form of
>>>Darwinist `blind watchmaker' evolution, if it were proved true, since the
>>>Bible teaches quite clearly that God is in total control of all events, even
>>>those that appear random to man (cf. Proverbs 16:33; 1 Kings 22:34).
>>>However, I have yet to see any compelling evidence that Darwinist `blind
>>>watchmaker' evolution is true, at least in any major sense.
>>>
>>>Two quotes that best sum up my position are those of Phil Johnson:
>>>
>>>"I am a philosophical theist and a Christian. I believe that a God exists
who
>>>could create out of nothing if He wanted to do so, but who might have
>>>chosen to work through a natural evolutionary process instead. I am not a
>>>defender of creation-science..." (Johnson P.E., "Darwin on Trial," 1993,
>>>p14)
>
>[...]
>
>>SJ>My position has superficially a number of elements in common with
>>>naturalistic evolution, and some evolutionists (and creationists) may
>>>assume that I am just a crypto-evolutionist. NOTHING COULD BE
>>>FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. I believe that Naturalistic Evolution is a
>>>counterfeit of the genuine article, which is Mediate Creation. I also
believe
>>>that Theistic Evolution is a contradiction in terms-if it was theistic,
>>>then it was *creation* not evolution, and vice versa.
>
>BH>I wondered if you might clarify your statement:
>>
>>"I also believe that Theistic Evolution is a contradiction in terms-if
>>it was theistic, then it was *creation* not evolution, and vice versa."
>>
>>in view of your earlier comments above.
>
>I said a number of things in my comments above which seem clear to me.
>Perhaps Brian can be more specific as to what exactly he wants me to
>clarify and why?
>

OK. A TE would believe that God chose "...to work through a natural
evolutionary process instead" (see PJ quote above). Thus, apparently
you do not have any problem with what TE's believe in principle.
Why then is Theistic Evolution a contradiction in terms? Is it only
the name that you don't like? I personally prefer evolutionary creationist.

Brian Harper
Associate Professor
Applied Mechanics
The Ohio State University

"All kinds of private metaphysics and theology have
grown like weeds in the garden of thermodynamics"
-- E. H. Hiebert