> Thanks to Kevin for this statement which I have read carefully. I do not
> intend to comment on it at this stage, except to say that it sounds like
> a form of Deistic Evolution.
>
Stephen can label them however he likes (and he will do so to his own
advantage, regardless of whether his label is correct or not), but they are
my beliefs, and I believe that God actively participated in the creation and
development of His own universe. The problem is that we probably can never
know to what extent He did participate, because He used the physiochemical
laws whenever He did, thus producing results that are virtually
indistinguishable from events with naturalistic causes. Deistic evolution
assumes a priori a disinterested God who does virtually nothing except watch
(if even that). Theistic evolution and evolutionary creationism, however,
assume a priori an active God who does as much as He desires to do; the fact
that we may not know the extent to which He has acted does not invalidate
this point. It is inappropriate to declare certain theistic beliefs deistic
simply because those beliefs do not say how active God was.
I would in turn ask Stephen what is the dividing line between theism and
deism? How much activity must God display so that Stephen would recognize
His participation as theistic and not deistic? And can Stephen support such
criteria with sound theological arguments? (Ignoring of course the most
basic question: is Stephen so monomaniacal that he believes he can dictate
to God what level of activity is appropriate for the Ancient of Days?)
>
> It is sufficient for my argument that Kevin's calling on other
Reflectorites
> to "explain what each of you `TRULY believe'" disconfirms Loren's claim
> that:
>
> LH>Most (if not all) TE/ECs on this Reflector take great pains, again and
> >again, to carefully explain what they TRULY believe, and to explain how
> >what they believe differs from broad philosophical evolutionism.
>
If Stephen honestly believes that then I have prime residential real estate
in the middle of the Everglades I would like to sell him cheap.
Before he decides, however, perhaps he should know that I did not make my
request because I did not know what other "TE/ECs" TRULY believe, but to
encourage them to prove wrong his claim that it is "*almost impossible* to
get TE/ECs 'to carefully explain what they TRULY believe' regarding TE/EC and
how 'what they believe differs from broad philosophical evolutionism'."
Unfortunately, since I am the only idiot who still treats Stephen seriously
enough to respond to him in depth, my request probably went unread. No
conclusions can be drawn from the response to a request no one else knew
about.
(Damn! Now I'll never sell that swamp hole! Me and my big mouth.)
Kevin L. O'Brien