Re: Phillip Johnson (and Methodological Naturalism)

From: Josh Bembenek (jbembe@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Oct 15 2003 - 13:19:35 EDT

  • Next message: Howard J. Van Till: "Re: Phillip Johnson (and Methodological Naturalism)"

    >A question for Jonathon Wells (or his defenders):
    >
    >If there are now things that happen "naturally," does that mean that they
    >are therefore in conflict with, or could not be a manifestation of, "God's
    >purposeful, creative activity"?
    >

    Sure, if we take a very limited view of the issues at hand and form a view
    of the bible that equates with God's True Word as saying that evolution is
    impossible and did not happen.

    But then Ken Ham believes that all dog kinds (from foxes to wolves to the
    poodle) are descendants of two parental dog kinds from Noah's boat that
    quickly diversified into all known species. This event does not appear to
    be mutually exclusive with God's creative activity. I wonder what Wells'
    and ID's take on that argument would be, since they see evolution as such an
    inefficient process.

    Josh

    p.s. I don't know if I'm a "Wells Defender" but I answered anyway

    _________________________________________________________________
    Want to check if your PC is virus-infected? Get a FREE computer virus scan
    online from McAfee.
    http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Oct 15 2003 - 13:19:43 EDT