As a scientist and a T.E. myself.... I have to agree with your statements
in your message. A T.E. position is a religious position and it cannot be
science (due to it's nature). Very good point!
Best Wishes,
William - N6RKY
Moorad Alexanian wrote:
>
> Dear Keith,
>
> Thank you for your comments. We believe that God is in control instant by
> instant but we do not really know how He does it. We merely see and
> experience the effects of His actions. However, our explanations do not
> constitute science as the word "science" ought to be understood. That is the
> qualm I have with theistic evolution. What they expound is not science but
> could very well be the correct explanation. The trouble with the
> amalgamation of science and our Christian faith is that we can only use it
> as a way of combating the excesses of radical evolutionists. We do that not
> with Scripture or our ideas but by finding holes in their very own science.
>
> Take care,
>
> Moorad
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith B Miller <kbmill@ksu.edu>
> To: asa@calvin.edu <asa@calvin.edu>
> Date: Friday, June 04, 1999 10:30 PM
> Subject: Re: Dino-Birds
>
> >Moorad wrote;
> >
> >>Bob has raised a good point--that natural selection cannot foresee the
> >>future. I should like to ask the following question to you all: What or
> Who
> >>determines the possible outcomes granting the fact that natural selection
> is
> >>governing the future outcomes? An honest answer to this question will
> >>definitely lead to God--the law Maker and Giver! Here is an example of a
> >>question that at first seems to be a scientific question that, on
> attempting
> >>to answer such a question, leads to God. Of course, the same can be said
> of
> >>all the laws that men discover. Whence comes the laws of nature?
> >
> >There are different ways of thinking about how God directs His creation to
> >His purposes. How this is viewed would depend on how "independent" one
> >understands the creation to be. Independence would here mean the extent to
> >wish God grants freedom to His creation (an analogy with human free will
> >could be made). There is a lot of interesting debate on this, and I don't
> >yet have a clear theological position.
> >
> >Regardless, I do not think it appropriate to think that new structures or
> >features are coerced by God from creation that would otherwise be
> >maladaptive. In that case new unadaptive traits would have to be
> >maintained by God in opposition to the "natural" processes he had already
> >established. However, new traits could certainly arise as selectively
> >neutral features, or as secondary biproducts of other features which have a
> >high selective value.
> >
> >Keith
> >
> >
> >
> >Keith B. Miller
> >Department of Geology
> >Kansas State University
> >Manhattan, KS 66506
> >kbmill@ksu.ksu.edu
> >http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~kbmill/
> >
> >
-- William A. Wetzel icq-uin# 13983514 http://home.pacbell.net/n6rky http://www.qsl.net/n6rky mailto:n6rky@pacbell.net mailto:n6rky@qsl.net