On Thu, 10 Jun 1999 18:17:44 -0700, Brian D Harper wrote:
[...]
>>BH>I wondered if you might clarify your statement:
>>>
>>SJ>"I also believe that Theistic Evolution is a contradiction in terms-if
>>>it was theistic, then it was *creation* not evolution, and vice versa."
>>> >>>in view of your earlier comments above.
>SJ>I said a number of things in my comments above which seem clear to me.
>>Perhaps Brian can be more specific as to what exactly he wants me to
>>clarify and why?
BH>OK. A TE would believe that God chose "...to work through a natural
>evolutionary process instead" (see PJ quote above). Thus, apparently
>you do not have any problem with what TE's believe in principle.
I already said "I would have no problem with even the most extreme form
of Darwinist `blind watchmaker' evolution, if it were proved true..." So
why would I have a problem with "what TE's believe in principle"?
BH>Why then is Theistic Evolution a contradiction in terms?
I already explained that: "if it was theistic, then it was *creation* not
evolution, and vice versa." Here is another quote from Johnson which
might make my position clearer:
"`Creationism' means belief in creation in a more general sense. Persons
who believe that the earth is billions of years old and that simple forms of
life evolved gradually to become more complex forms including humans,
are "creationists" if they believe that a supernatural Creator not only
initiated the process but in some meaningful sense controls it in furtherance
of a purpose." (Johnson P.E., "Darwin on Trial," 1993, p4)
BH>Is it only the name that you don't like? I personally prefer evolutionary
>creationist.
It's not a question of liking or preferring a name. It's a question of the
*reality* that the words in the name signify.
The word "evolution" (as it is used in science today) asserts or implies that
the processes of biological origins and development were *undirected*,
*purposeless*, natural processes. Thus the original 1995 official Position
Statement of the American National Association of Biology Teachers
stated what "evolution" really means in the scientific literature today:
"The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unsupervised,
impersonal, unpredictable and natural process of temporal descent with
genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical
contingencies and changing environments." (National Association of
Biology Teachers, 1995 Statement on Teaching Evolution, in Johnson
P.E., "Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds," 1997, p15).
To say that an essentially "unsupervised...natural process" is "theistic" is
a contradiction in terms. If God created mediately then the right term to
use is Mediate Creation.
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"His powers of imagination were already well developed, and in addition to
childish fibs, he invented a bogus story that he was able to produce
variations in crocuses, polyanthuses, and primroses at will, by watering
them with coloured liquids, which was of course, as he admitted, 'a
monstrous fable,' but also shows that the was not unaware of variation,
even at that age." (de Beer G., "Charles Darwin: Evolution by Natural
Selection," Nelson: London UK, 1963, p24)
--------------------------------------------------------------------