Re: [asa] A graduate student speaks out

Wow Ted, I had no idea that one could write such a long ad hominem. I
am truly impressed. Sorry to have bothered you with my comments. And
no I have no interest in being distracted by your 'contribution'. My
comments stand.

On Jan 12, 2008 8:51 AM, Ted Davis <tdavis@messiah.edu> wrote:
> I agree with David Opderbeck, that the particular site Jack recommended is
> maintained by a person who really does *not* "have his head on," relative to
> the general religion/science package. He's clearly enamored of the modern
> "warfare" school of Dawkins and company. He obviously thinks that all or
> most Christians are idiots. Many years ago, when reviewing for "American
> Scientist" a book by another person who uses science against traditional
> religion (physicist Chet Raymo), alongside a book by Polkinghorne, I
> concluded by asking what a genuine conversation with Polkinghorne (with whom
> Raymo had only a passing familiarity, having shown no evidence of
> understanding Polkinghorne's views) would be like. I would ask the same of
> the person maintaining the site Jack sent us to. I won't hold my breath
> waiting for him to put his head on and have that conversation.
>
> Pim responds on this thread with his stock comment, this time expressed in
> two sentences as follows:
>
> >>> PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com> 01/11/08 9:18 PM >>>
> In this case he is 'making fun' of the lack of scientific depth of a
> Christian. We should all remember St Augustine here.
>
> I now respond to Pim.
>
> Pim, I agree that Augustine had good advice for Christians of all ages,
> advice that you rightly direct at persons in some situations. But it isn't
> a case of "one size fits all." I cannot recall ever seeing you do either of
> the following two things. (1) Criticize anyone who uses science to attack
> religion generally or Christianity specifically--not even someone who hates
> Christianity as much as Dawkins does. Perhaps you have done this, Pim, and
> if so I've missed it or have forgotten, and I invite correction. (2) Make
> any constructive comments about how Christians *ought to* engage science. I
> repeat what I just said about perhaps missing something, Pim, but have you
> done this? If not, do you have any thoughts about this? You say you are a
> Christian, you are obviously interested in science (I think you are a
> scientist?), you belong to PT and therefore follow at least one (rather
> narrow) area of contact involving religion and science. The ASA (which to
> the best of my knowledge you are not a member of) exists in order to be
> helpful to Christians who want to engage science: that is what we are about,
> simply put. Do you have any positive thoughts of your own about this? I am
> not calling for you to cite Augustine yet again, as your response--indeed
> that's what I'm asking you not to do. We understand your views on that and
> usually accept them (most ASA member don't need to be brought up to speed
> about Augustine). Do you have anything else to say?
>
> The absence of (1) and (2), unless I've missed it, combined with the
> constant invocation of a single passage in Augustine, suggests to me (at
> least) that you have a one-track mind on sci/rel interaction--and that's not
> really a good thing, IMO, esp when the one issue you focus on is so
> politically charged. I hope I'm wrong about that, Pim, and if so it would
> be good to round out the picture for me. Please help me do that.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ted
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Jan 12 14:05:42 2008