On Sat, 11 Sep 1999 10:07:33 -0500 (CDT), Susan B wrote:
>SJ>Only 10 percent said they believe in evolution with no participation from
>>God. Seven percent had no opinion. The views have not changed much in
>>recent years. A 1982 Gallup poll, asking the same question, found a
>>virtually identical distribution of opinion."
SB>Obviously this fills you with great glee.
Not particularly. I will be filled with great glee when the 10% is 0%!
SB>However, it completely refutes
>your contention--and that of your hero Philip Johnson
While I greatly admire Phil Johnson, he is not my "hero". I disagree with
Phil over some things and I have told him so. But I owe a great debt of
gratitude to Phil (see my Testimony on my web page), and I regard him
as one of the greatest Christian apologist of the 20th Century (even
though technically he is not a defender of Christianity). I think it is
*disgraceful* how the TE/ECs have treated Phil when originally he
was conciliatory towards them. Indeed that is a major reason why I
maintain that TE/ECs have, to varying degrees, been taken "captive
through [a] hollow and deceptive philosophy" (Col 2:8), namely scientific
materialism-naturalism.
SB>--that science is some
>kind of religious movement which uses evolution to indoctrinate our
>children.
No one is saying that about "science" per se. It is the *philosophy* of scientific
materialism-naturalism which is "some kind of religious movement which uses
evolution" ie. Darwinism "to" *attempt* to "indoctrinate our children".
SB>If that were true why isn't it more successful? After all, most
>children attend public schools.
I presume it "isn't it more successful" because kids are trained these days to
be sceptical and most of them find Darwinism frankly incredible!
When my own two kids were going through high school in the 1980s I was
in my "theistic evolution" phase and I told them that if evolution was true it
was just God's way of creating.
But they told me they both had this particular biology teacher who was a
zealot for evolution but the other kids, who were not from Christian
homes, made it plain that they found his explanation of evolution absurd.
And Australia isn't as religious a country as the USA.
Johnson says on one of his tapes that it was only the intellectuals who fell
for the bogus theories of Freud. The ordinary people thought it was absurd
and they turned out to be right! Even on this Reflector, it is hard to find an
evolutionist who is willing to defend Darwinism, as it is still being taught in
the schools.
Most evolutionists I have observed believe in what Ramm calls "the vague
theory", in which, writing in *1955*, he sounds ominously prophetic 44
years later:
"If evolution runs into serious material trouble it will have to be modified
or discarded. Perhaps it will be shown that genes and chromosomes are too
complex ever to have evolved but had to be created. Perhaps after two
hundred years of intensive experimentation all proposed mechanisms of
evolution will have to be discarded. Typical of many evolutionists is
Howells, who admits that there is no known mechanism for evolution yet
accepts the theory without facing the implications of a theory without a
mechanism. He writes:
`And there is also the mystery of how and why evolution takes place at
all...Evolution is a fact, like digestion...Nor is it known just why evolution
occurs, or exactly what guides its steps.' (Howells W., "Mankind So Far",
1944, Doubleday and Co., New York, p5)
The geological record might be troublesome to evolution. One hundred
more years of palaeontology might show the invalidity of many present
assumptions. Although Standen writes popularly he nonetheless has put his
finger on two of the sorest points of evolutionary theory, showing its
possible ultimate embarrassment with facts. (i) He correctly observes that
there is the vague theory and the precise theory. The vague theory is the
belief of scientists that evolution has occurred, The precise theory is the
hypothesis as to how evolution actually works. There is no known
satisfactory and clearly demonstrated precise theory of evolution. If
evolution is to " stick" as a scientific theory it must establish precise theory.
In spite of the fact that as yet no precise theory is forthcoming, the
evolutionists have unbounded faith in the vague theory. This is not science
at its best."
(Ramm B.L., "The Christian View of Science and Scripture", [1955],
Paternoster: Exeter, Devon, 1967, reprint, p189).
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen E. (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ Email: sejones@iinet.net.au
3 Hawker Avenue / Oz \ Web: http://www.iinet.net.au/~sejones
Warwick 6024 -> *_,--\_/ Phone: +61 8 9448 7439
Perth, Western Australia v "Test everything." (1 Thess. 5:21)
--------------------------------------------------------------------