Re: Inherently anti-theistic?

Lloyd Eby (leby@nova.umuc.edu)
Wed, 7 Jun 1995 19:19:49 -0400 (EDT)

On Wed, 7 Jun 1995, Bill Hamilton wrote:

> Loren quoted a point Stephen made that I wanted to come back to(but deleted
> the post in a fit of housecleaning) Thanks Loren
>
> >In an excellent post, Stephen Jones asked this question:
> >
> >> The question is not whether "Evolution is a scientific theory", but
> >> whether or not it is *inherently* an anti-theistic theory.
>
> My perception is that it is a contradiction in terms to claim that a
> scientific theory is anti-theistic. Scientific theories deal with natural
> phenonena, not with first causes or supernatural or spiritual issues.
> _People_ can be anti-theistic, and they can even try to enlist the support
> of scientific theories for their anti-thestic positions. But I believe it
> is illogical to say that a scientific theory is anti-theistic.

I'd like to see Jonathan Wells respond to this. Jonathan wrote a Yale
Ph.D. dissertation in theology in which he *proved* (or so he claimed --
I didn't read the dissertation) that Darwinism is anti-theistic (again,
if I understand correctly what he told me). If that is so, it would show
either that a scientific theory *can* be anti-theisic, or that Darwinism,
in so far as it contains things which speak to theology, is extra-scientific.

Lloyd Eby
leby@nova.umuc.edu