Jon is absolutely spot-on.
Firstly IDers must come clean on the age of the earth. Some say iti is a
secondary issue but we cant decide anything about evolution until the age is
clear - one way or the other.
What is totally silly is that the vast age of the earth has been apparent
since about 1750
Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Clarke" <jdac@alphalink.com.au>
To: "Shuan Rose" <shuanr@boo.net>
Cc: "george murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>; "Glenn Morton"
<glenn.morton@btinternet.com>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 11:22 PM
Subject: Re: ID: A tent for all theists? Was :RE: Moon proclaims he is
>
> Hi Shaun
>
> The problem for me with siding with ID crowd is three-fold. Firstly, the
> arguments of Johnson are primarily metaphysical and are built on what
> is to me a
> very poor understanding of God's action in the world. Therefore if I
> support ID,
> I also Johnson's poor (in fact downright heretical) theology. Because ID
is a
> big tent, this means I am also supporting metaphysics (theology is not a
broad
> enough word) with which I strongly disagree, such as deists, moonies, and
> raelians. I agree with Johnson that the extreme materialism of
> Provine, Dawkins
> et al. must be opposed, however because their materialism is metaphysical
in
> nature it must be opposed by good metaphysics, not something so vague
> and shonky
> as to be acceptable to deists, moonies, raelians - and Christians. I
mistrust a
> metaphysical tent so large as to include those mentioned above - but
> so narrow as
> to exclude evangelical, reformed, and generally Christians who happen
> to support
> organic evolution.
>
> Secondly, the palaeontological, ecological, and biogeographical evidence
for
> descent with modification is for me so overwhelming that to oppose it
> is to place
> oneself firmly into the flat earth and geocentric camp. This does
> not mean that
> some, indeed many aspects of current organic evolutionary theories are
above
> critcism, they are most certainly not. But the ID crowd almost
> completely ignore
> or misrepresent it this evidence. They have proved incapable of
correction on
> these failings.
>
> Thirdly I utterly disagree with the metaphysics of Dawkins et al.
> However their
> science is usually OK. It is therefore more honest for me to say I agree
with
> the science, but I disagree with the metaphysical conclusions they
> draw from it,
> or rather the metaphysical agenda to which they subject their science.
>
> Fourthly, the refusal of most ID to come clean about the age of the earth
and
> universe to me is suspicious. It smacks of a strategic ploy to gain
> support from
> the YEC movement. Although Johnson once distanced himself from YEC and
Behe
> stated he believed in an old earth, this has been down played. Of
> course if they
> did they might loose the support of YECs, who have used ID arguments with
great
> enthusiasm. Of course it raises the suspicion amongst many
> scientists that ID is
> only a front for YEC. Not only to I find this dishonest, it also
> shows the lack
> of scientific credibility of the ID movement.
>
> Jon
>
> Shuan Rose wrote:
>
> > messiah! Impact on ID?
> > Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 11:03:08 -0400
> > Sender: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
> > Precedence: bulk
> >
> > Presumably ID is supposed to be a big tent uniting theists (all of whom
> > believe that God is the creator?/designer? against antireligious
> > evolutionists, like Dawkins, Dennett, Provine etc. Yet it has not
worked out
> > that way, with many religious thinkers attacking ID. Why? Are'nt
Phillip,
> > Jonathon et al. on our side , fighting against the forces of darkness,
led
> > by the Lord of Hellfire himself, Dawkins? (OK, maybe he isn't THE Lord
of
> > Hellfire, but IMO he may be one of his minions :-)
> > Well, Glenn, George? Do you think you are giving aid and comfort to the
> > enemy by "lining up" with , say, Dawkins & Eugene Scott against
defenders of
> > theism like Phillip Johnson and Jonathon Wells.? Even if they are wrong
> > about a few technical and theological issues, shouldn't we being lining
up
> > with them ?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
> > Behalf Of george murphy
> > Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 7:37 PM
> > To: Glenn Morton
> > Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> > Subject: Re: Moon proclaims he is messiah! Impact on ID?
> >
> > I sent my earlier post before looking at the item Glenn
refers to
> > below. Having done so, I can heartily recommend it as the funniest
> > religious
> > news item I've seen in many years. Note especially the following:
> > "At the celestial event, Muhammed is said to have led three
cheers,
> > while God submitted a letter stating, 'I believe in the True Parents.'"
> > Just try to picture it. Words fail me.
> >
> > George
> >
> > Glenn Morton wrote:
> >
> > > In a move which surely must cause a bit of embarrassment for the ID
> > group,
> > > Phil Johnson and other ID members, Rev. Sun Myung Moon has
proclaimed
> > "that
> > > Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha - even God - have told him he is now 'the
Savior,
> > > Messiah and King of Kings of all of humanity!'"
> > > http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/nation/3641062.htm
> > >
> > > This may have some impact on the ID movement but to explain why
requires
> > > some background.
> > >
> > > Keith Miller, in Dec. 1999 published a note with Jonathan Well's
web
> > papers
> > > proclaiming that he was a Moonie. Keith attached a note from
Phillip
> > Johnson
> > > at the bottom. Johnson acknowledges that he knew Wells is a Moonie
but
> > > frankly expresses a big yawn for that knowledge. I posted a
response to
> > > Keith's note outlining what I viewed as the ID movement's lack of
concern
> > > for Scriptural Christianity.
> > > http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/199912/0024.html.
> > >
> > > I also had been having an e-mail conversations with Paul Nelson
just
> > > before Keith's note. Paul had already confirmed to me that Wells
was a
> > > Moonie and a fine fellow. He said that they merely disagreed about
> > theology.
> > > I should hope so! But at what point do our attempts to create an
> > apologetic
> > > become worthless for our faith?
> > >
> > > I think the question for the evangelical supporters of the ID
movement
> > and
> > > the Discovery Institute is: Should we support someone with views
like
> > this?
> > > Will Nelson and colleagues like Steve Meyer, in light of Moon's
> > > proclamation that he is the 'King of King for all humanity!"
continue to
> > > encourage evangelical publishers to publish Well's stuff? Wells who
now
> > must
> > > believe that Sun Myung Moon is the Messiah seems to hold values
quite at
> > > odds with conventional Christianity. It seems to me that ID has
become
> > so
> > > theologically neutral as to be of no value to Christianity.
> > >
> > > glenn
> > >
> > > see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
> > > for lots of creation/evolution information
> > > anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
> > > personal stories of struggle
>
> --
> "It is not easy to see how the more extreme forms of nationalism can
> long survive
> when men have seen the earth as a pale crescent dwindling against the
stars,
> until at last they look for it in vain".
>
> Arthur C. Clarke
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 16 2002 - 17:54:48 EDT