Dear Bjoern,
Following is a copy of something I recently posted on another listserve in
response to someone who considered evolution by random mutation and natural
selection to be a "silly" idea:
I have no idea why (name) considers it silly, but let me explain briefly
why I do not.
I am a "theological creationist." That is, I believe the universe has been
given being by a Creator. I also believe that questions regarding the
formational history of the universe are being investigated with both
competence and integrity by the majority of professional scientists.
What was given being by the Creator? _Everything_ that the universe _is_ and
_is capable of doing_.
Focusing on capabilities, I view every formational capability manifest by
elementary particles, atoms, molecules, molecular aggregates, cells,
organisms, etc., as a 'gift of being' given to the universe by its Creator.
Another 'gift of being' is the universe's "potentiality space" of viable
life forms--a "space" in which similar life forms would be located close to
one another. (If you like, you could imagine clusters of points defining a
species, then clusters of clusters defining a genus, etc.)
Because I see the universe as a creation, I hold to the expectation that the
universe's potentiality space is vast and rich with potential life forms and
that the universe is also gifted with a robust set of formational
capabilities that function as connective pathways through that potentiality
space, thereby making evolutionary change possible. From a theological
creationist point of view, these qualities are seen as manifestations of the
Creator's creativity (in conceptualizing this universe's rich and robust
being) and the Creator's generosity (in giving such fullness of being to the
creation).
In this context, what are commonly called a 'random mutations' function as a
creator-provided means of exploring new regions of potentiality space, and
'natural selection' functions as a test of viability within the extant
ecosystem and physical environment.
So, to put this in the style of Genesis 1, the history of biotic evolution
(to which random mutation and natural selection contribute) would be
interpreted as the creation's response to the Creator's intention expressed
in words like, "Let there be an ongoing exploration of the creation's
potentiality space and let those creatures suited to their biotic and
physical environments be fruitful and multiply."
In conclusion, then, I see nothing silly in considering the possibility
that, _given a creation gifted from the outset with both a rich potentiality
space and a robust set of formational capabilities_, the remarkable
phenomenon of macro-evolution by means of random mutation and natural
selection might actually work.
Howard Van Till
Professor of Physics and Astronomy (retired)
Calvin College
Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
PS: For more on this, see the following recent essays and book chapters that
I have written (especially book chapter #2):
Essays:
1. "Basil, Augustine, and the Doctrine of Creation's Functional Integrity,"
published in Science and Christian Belief, Vol. 8. No. 1, April, 1996, pp.
21-38,
2. "The Creation: Intelligently Designed or Optimally Equipped?" published
in Theology Today, October, 1998, pp. 344-64.
3. "Does Intelligent Design Have a Chance?" Zygon, Vol. 34, No. 4, December,
1999, pp. 667-675.
Book chapters:
1. "No Place for a Small God," published as a chapter in John Marks
Templeton, ed., _How Large is God?_ (Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation
Press, 1997), pp. 113-136.
2. "The Fully Gifted Creation," published as a chapter in the book, _Three
Views on Creation and Evolution_, edited by J. P. Moreland and John Mark
Reynolds, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1999), pp.
161-247.
3. "Intelligent Design: The Celebration of Gifts Withheld?" published as a
chapter in the book, _Darwinism Defeated? The Johnson-Lamoureux Debate on
Biological Origins_, by Denis O. Lamoureux, Phillip E. Johnson, et al.
(Vancouver: Regent College Publishing, 1999), pp. 81-90.
----------
>From: Bjoern Moeller <dj_mic20@yahoo.com>
>To: asa@calvin.edu
>Subject: basic TE
>Date: Sat, Apr 8, 2000, 9:05 AM
>
> Dear list,
>
> as I am preparing for a column I occasionally do in a
> Norwegian Christian newspaper I would like to gather
> some information regarding theistic evolution.
>
> If it is possible to agree on; what are the basic
> principles or doctrines of TE ? Is it like 'God¥s
> creation + evolution', or are the matters more
> complicated ? (I guess so).
>
> If anyone could take time and effort to answer my
> question, I would be very grateful. If not, could
> anyone at least refer to some serious source of TE,
> i.e. books, articles, web pages etc.
>
> In Christ
>
> Bjoern Moeller,
> Student of Philosophy,
> Copenhagen University.
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 08 2000 - 10:07:21 EDT