Re: [asa] Keller on Evolution

Thanks for posting that interview! It might be helpful to add a little more
context around that quote:

"You've got some problems with the theistic evolution, because then you have
to ask yourself, "Was there no Adam and Eve? Was there no Fall?" So here's
what I like—the messy approach, which is I think there was an Adam and Eve.
I think there was a real Fall. I think that happened. I also think that
there also was a very long process probably, you know, that the earth
probably is very old, and there was some kind of process of natural
selection that God guided and used, and maybe intervened in. And that's just
the messy part. I'm not a scientist. I'm not going to go beyond that.

I do know that I say in the book, "This is an absolute red herring—to get
mired in this before you look at the certainties of the faith. Because the
fact is that real orthodox believers with a high view of Scripture are all
over the map on this. I can line up ten really smart people in all those
different buckets, which I'll call "theistic evolution," "young-Earth
creationism," and let's call it "progressive creationism" or "semi-theistic
evolution." There are all these different views. And when you see a lot of
smart people disagreeing on this stuff, well . . .

How could there have been death before Adam and Eve fell? The answer is, I
don't know. But all I know is, didn't animals eat bugs? Didn't bugs eat
plants? There must have been death. In other words, when you realize, "Oh
wait, this is really complicated," then you realize, "I don't have to figure
this out before I figure out is Jesus Christ raised from the dead."

Over the years—it's not bad, but I've gotten sort of hit from both sides."

 So it's more than divine action -- it's the theological problems relating
to the Fall that many of us wrestle with. But the absolutely key thing, and
this is one of the reasons I love Tim Keller, is the ability to say "this is
messy and it isn't of first importance in bringing someone to faith." Amen!

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Steve Martin <steven.dale.martin@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> First Things published an interview with Keller this morning re: his
> book. (See: http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=981). Not sure we
> should really call him TE (He personally disavows the term - includes TE as
> one of the options with "insurmountable difficulties"). He says (highlights
> added by myself):
>
> At the same time, if you say, "There is no God and everything happened by
> > evolution," naturalistic evolution—*then you have "theistic evolution":
> > God just started things years ago and everything has come into being through
> > the process of evolution.* You have young-Earth six-day creationism,
> > which is "God created everything in six 24-hour days." To me, all three of
> > those positions have perhaps insurmountable difficulties.
> >
>
> Looks like it is the whole divine action issue that is confusing him -
> either God did it or evolution did it. This isn't surprising since many of
> us that hold to a TE / EC view have difficulty articulating it clearly (I
> do) even if we aren't confused ourselves (don't think I am :-) ).
>
> Again, the important point is that Keller reiterates that these "origins
> issues" are red herrings & that he can accept those with TE / EC views as
> orthodox believers. It's an important first step.
>
> thanks,
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Ted Davis <TDavis@messiah.edu> wrote:
>
> > Among Rich Blinne's point is this one:
> > Keller mentions with approval of Francis Collins in the main text. He
> > also
> > responds to
> > Dawkins' citation of a survey where 7% of the NAS are believers with
> > the survey published in Nature showing a much greater number of
> > scientists who are believers.
> >
> > Ted hopes to illuminate this point.
> > Dawkins, I assume was citing the same survey that Keller also cites.
> > Results appeared both in Nature and in Scientific American. The
> > authors,
> > Larry Witham and Edward Larson, repeated the famous survey of the
> > religious
> > beliefs of American scientists that had been carried out by atheist
> > psychologist James Leuba in 1914. They used exactly the same
> > instrument,
> > and the same reference set: Members of the AAAS, who are listed in
> > "American
> > Men and Women of Science." They polled two groups: regular members,
> > plus
> > members of the NAS. Leuba did not poll NAS members per se, although the
> > NAS
> > did exist then (it was founded during the Civil War to help the Union
> > cause). Rather, Leuba polled "starred" scientists listed in what was
> > then
> > called "American Men of Science." The star system was discontinued
> > about 30
> > years later, but at that time the most "eminent" scientists had
> > asterisks
> > next to their names in "American Men of Science." (Incidentally, until
> > relatively recently, the word "scientist," which was coined in the
> > 1830s,
> > was not much used. You were a "man of science," and indeed most of
> > those
> > men were in fact men. There was no term "woman of science," as far as I
> > know. Virtually all of the "starred" scientists were men.) I won't go
> > further into the story of the star system, but it's a real hoot.
> >
> > So, what Larson & Witham found was, that from the general group of AAAS
> > members, 39.3% affirmed belief in a personal God, as vs 41.8% in Leuba's
> > survey. This contradicts Leuba's personal expectation and hope that, as
> > science advanced in the 20th century, religious belief would decline
> > markedly. On the other hand, Lebua found that among "elite" (ie,
> > starred)
> > scientists, 27.7% believed in God. Larson & Witham found just 7.0%among
> > the NAS members. (Interestingly, among mathematicians in the NAS, the
> > figure doubles to 14.3%, which is consistent with the fact that more
> > mathematicians from the general AAAS group are also believers (it's
> > nearly
> > half). No surprise to me, given the transcendental character of
> > mathematical truths.)
> >
> > Here's some of the data I refer to:
> >
> > http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/sci_relig.htm
> >
> > So, Dawkins and Keller were citing the same survey.
> >
> > Ted
> >
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Steve Martin (CSCA)
> http://evanevodialogue.blogspot.com
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Feb 25 14:13:01 2008