From: Howard J. Van Till:
The historic doctrine of creation
Silk here: And just what might that doctrine be?
I'm so relieved that you are not going to say
"why the bible of course"!
----- Original Message -----
From: Howard J. Van Till <hvantill@novagate.com>
To: <evolution@calvin.edu>
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 2:59 PM
Subject: Re: [METAVIEWS] 098: Intelligent Design Coming Clean, Part 2 of 4
> The historic _doctrine_ of creation articulates the belief that the entire
> universe was given its "being" (its existence, character, resources,
> capabilities, potentialities,...) by a Creator. This doctrine says nothing
> about the particulars of the formational history of the created world.
>
>
> So, if Darwin says "I had two distinct objects in view; *firstly*, to shew
> that species had not been SEPARATELY created ..."
>
> And if Darwin says that he has "...done good service in aiding to
overthrow
> the dogma of SEPARATE creations..."
>
> ...then Darwin has said nothing contrary to the _doctrine_ of creation,
but
> has made a contribution only to the matter of the particulars of the
> universe's formational history. In his judgment, the dogma of SEPARATE
> creations (pictured as a succession of episodes of form-imposing divine
> intervention) was contradicted by the empirical evidence.
>
> For Mr. Jones to confuse the dogma of SEPARATE form-imposing interventions
> (a matter of formational history) with the DOCTRINE of creation (a matter
of
> the source of the universe's being) is seriously to
> misunderstand/misrepresent the issue.
>
> Howard Van Till
>
> PS: If anyone is interested in my response to Dembski's "Intelligent
Design
> Coming Clean" see Metaviews #100
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 25 2001 - 12:36:03 EST