>I'm still inclined to say that people's resistance to evolutionary theory
>stems primarily from a belief that Christian theology requires/favors a
>special creationist/interventionist mode of creation and that they are
>worried about the apologetic impact of an evolutionary account (--like Phil
>Johnson's view that if God's activity is not evident then he is a
>superfluous add-on to our thinking). I think that Stephen's own posts over
>the past year is evidence of the former. I happen to disagree and am much
>more open to the evolutionary account than he is as a result.
Two comments:
1. I believe one of the most compelling reasons for creationist opposition to
evolution is a concern that children will interpret it to mean that God
is at best unnecessary and at worst nonexistent.
2. Re Terry's remark about "Phil Johnson's view that if God's activity is not
evident then he is a superfluous add-on to our thinking". An implication
of this view, IMO, is that however God goes about performing His oversight
of nature, man can detect it. Isn't that giving men credit for abilities
they don't necessarily have? People like Richard Dawkins of course fall
into the same error when they claim that since they can find no evidence of
God from their investigations, God doesn't exist. Again they're assuming
that no matter how God goes about His oversight, if He indeed were doing so,
they could detect it. Both views seem to me to be man-centered. God's
instructions for how men can know Him include Hebrews 11.
Bill Hamilton | Chassis & Vehicle Systems
GM R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX)
hamilton@gmr.com (office) | whamilto@mich.com (home)