Re: Literature reform

lhaarsma@opal.tufts.edu
Thu, 12 Oct 1995 09:55:36 -0500 (EST)

Stephen Jones described his perception of TE:

SJ> TE seems to want to minimise God's direct intervention, whereas YEC
> and PC wish to maximise it. [...]
>
> Most if not all the TE's on the
> Reflector seem to be less than enthusiatic about "God intervening in
> nature at strategic points". Where they do concede it, it seems to be
> only the bare minimum. Every effort is made to give evolution the
> benefit of the doubt and downplay creation. I can only conclude it is
> due to a "modern-day spirit of naturalism".

Alternative: I conclude that TE reasoning is due to ...

A desire for a consistent hermeneutics of Genesis 1.
A desire for a consistent understanding of God's creational and
providential interaction with the world.
A desire to understand of the proper scope and role of "naturalistic
knowledge" within a theistic world-view.
A desire for a consistent understanding of God's "design" in nature.
A desire for a consistent understanding of the role of God's miracles
in history.
A desire to get as far away as necessary from the theological problems
of "apparent age" and "false history."
A desire to fully appreciate the theological import of God's ability to
achieve his purposes through natural mechanisms.
A desire to see as much beauty and grandeur in creation as possible.

These are the sorts of ideas which motivate TE's. You may argue that PC
does a better job on those points. I believe that TE does. I will expand
upon these points in another post, "Theological reasons for
macroevolution." I hope that post will give ample reason for at least
ENTERTAINING an alternative conclusion to the one you presently hold.

Your use of the phrase, "... give evolution the benefit of the doubt and
downplay creation" presupposes that the two concepts are antagonistic.
They are not.

Belief that macroevolution is probably true is NOT the "spirit of
Naturalism" because (1) We are not talking about minimizing God's
supernatural intervention in GENERAL; we are talking about one PARTICULAR
area: biological history. (2) We are not talking about minimizing God's
creativity or his interaction with the world, we are debating particulars
about the METHODS he used. (3) The theological and philosophical
motivations which TE's offer are from within Christian tradition.

Loren Haarsma