Re: left-handed non-biological amino acids

Adrian Teo (AdrianTeo@mailhost.net)
Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:59:15 -0700

David J. Tyler wrote:
>
> On 9 Apr 97 at 21:51, Stephen Jones wrote, quoting Erickson:
>
> > "...deistic evolution is perhaps the best way to describe one variety
> > of what is generally called theistic evolution. This is the view
> > that God began the process of evolution, producing the first matter
> > and implanting within the creation the laws which its development has
> > followed. Thus, he programmed the process. Then he withdrew from
> > active involvement with the world, becoming, so to speak, Creator
> > emeritus. The progress of the created order is free of direct
> > influence by God. He is the Creator of everything, but only the
> > first living form was directly created. All the rest of God's
> > creating has been done indirectly. God is the Creator, the ultimate
> > cause, but evolution is the means, the proximate cause. Thus, except
> > for its view of the very beginning of matter, deistic evolution is
> > identical to naturalistic evolution for it denies that there is any
> > direct activity by a personal God during the ongoing creative
> > process." (Erickson M.J., "Christian Theology", 1985, p480)
>
> My contribution is just a plea dor debaters to "hear" what others are
> saying. There may be some deistic evolutionists around, but this is
> hardly relevant to the mainstream debate. As far as I can see, the
> vast majority of Christians who contribute to this list are THEISTS.

Pardon me for interrupting, but I don't see how an orthodox Christian
can be anything else but a theist.

> That is, we all believe in the ongoing, sustaining government of God
> over his creation. We all recognise that the process of natural
> selection acting on natural variations is a part of this
> government. We all recognise that these processes have
> ecological significance (preserving the status quo, providing
> for adaptation to changing environments, etc). There are some who
> consider that these processes have creative significance and link
> them to evolutionary explanations of origins. If this is where the
> real divergences of view are to be found, let us focus debate here.
> Deistic evolution is not an issue - unless someone overtly defends
> that view.

-- ******************************Adrian TeoInstitute of Child DevelopmentUniversity of MinnesotaE-mail: AdrianTeo@mailhost.net******************************