I would echo an amen to James' observation here. When I try to promote the
ASA to fellow Christians in the sciences, including colleagues at Christian
colleges, I often get a lukewarm response because the ASA is perceived as
having a party line of TE. Maybe we need to state the range of opinions more
explicitly in our publicity.
I like James' description of himself as sort of "none of the above," because
it fits pretty well to where I am at after 25 years as a Christian chemist
wrestling with origins issues.
John Stahl
Geneva College
>Folks,
>
>Much as I respect Keith for his obvious Christian witness, I think it
>good for Weister's voice to be heard among evangelicals. Our reputation
>among our Christian brothers is equally as important as is our
>reputation among the scientific community. I professionally (when I get
>time from high teaching loads) study the fossil record (paleoecology of
>Carboniferous coal-swamps). I am not TE (theistic evolution) nor for
>that matter YEC (young earth creation) or ID (intelligent design).
>
>Like Wiester I worry about the secularizing influence of the
>evolutionary dogma when it is taught as it often is as accounting for
>the world and organism originating without a Creator. Obviously TE's
>and Keith would agree with me.
>
>It saddens me that too often ASA is seen by evangelicals as no different
>than a secular science that appears to them as teaches that God had
>nothing to do with Creation. It is good for them to see that there are
>a variety of voices in ASA and if they go to our web site or read some
>of our publications they may find some help in changing some of their
>ideas that are poor science. Mybe we can help layfolks understand
>science better.
>--
>James and Florence Mahaffy 712 722-0381 (Home)
>227 S. Main St. 712 722-6279 (Office)
>Sioux Center, IA 51250
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 21 2001 - 09:31:58 EST