From: Sarah Berel-Harrop (sec@hal-pc.org)
Date: Mon Aug 18 2003 - 11:15:06 EDT
On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 08:19:30 -0400
"Howard J. Van Till" <hvantill@chartermi.net> wrote:
>>From: "Sarah Berel-Harrop" <sec@hal-pc.org>
>
>A couple points of agreement worth noting.
>
>1. > Accordingly, there is
>> no reason to invoke "intelligent intervention" unless
>>and
>> until all of the other [natural] possibilities are
>>exhausted ....
>
>2. > My second point was that it is inappropriate to set
>ID
>> against RM & NS because they are not collectively
>> exhaustive of all of the possibilities.
>
>Correct. What Dembski and other ID advocates place in an
>exhaustive
>either/or relationship is ID and the joint effect of ALL
>known and unknown
>natural processes, of which the RM & NS process
>constitutes only a portion.
Well, while we are at it, neither are ID (in the sense
that the Creation reveals God's activity, eg in the
sense of Ps 19, Romans 1:18-20, etc) and evolutionary
biology, or even NS & RM alone, mutually exclusive,
and Josh has already admitted that, but the supposed
mutual exclusivity of the two is a major point underlying
Dembski, Johnson, et al's arguments.
>Howard Van Till
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Aug 18 2003 - 11:17:52 EDT