RE: [asa] public response (McGrath on ID)

McGrath on ID:

Here's what McGrath has to say about ID, from "The Dawkins Delusion" pg.
30:

"The real problem here, however, is the forced relocation of God by
doubtless well-intentioned Christian apologists into the hidden recesses
of the universe, beyond evaluation or investigation. Now that's a real
concern. For this strategy is still used by the intelligent design
movement-- a movement, based primarily in North America, that argues for
an "intelligent Designer" based on gaps in scientific explanation, such
as the "irreducible complexity" of the world. It is not an approach
which I accept, either on scientific or theological grounds. In my view,
those who adopt this approach make Christianity deeply-- and
needlessly-- vulnerable to scientific progress."

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Rich Blinne
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 9:00 PM
To: David Opderbeck
Cc: Randy Isaac; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] public response

On May 19, 2008, at 8:16 PM, David Opderbeck wrote:

What is the context of this discussion? (BTW, McGrath has also clearly
written negative things about ID in his "Dawkins God" book).

I knew there was a quote there but I couldn't find it. So, If you could
feed me that it would be greatly appreciated.

Here's the context our church is promoting the Truth Project run by
Focus on the Family. Del Tackett runs this and has a blog. On that blog
was an unqualified support of the movie, Expelled. I sent what I will be
quoting below as a comment. It was held in moderation for a number of
days so I assumed it was in the same black hole of censorship that the
Uncommon Descent blog was. Hopefully, my further comments make it
through. I let Randy know of this along with our disappointment that our
ASA meeting on having a Christian worldview on technology while Michael
Behe's talk was packed. The latter was the usual retread of 15-year-old
disproven points. It was also a crass promotion of Expelled.

As we have been discussing here, I wanted to convey how completely
inaccurate Expelled is and more importantly how spiritually damaging it
is. On Saturday our board met and we were all pretty depressed. Our hope
of providing a place of attracting young Christians in the sciences was
pretty well dashed -- at least through evangelical churches. Because of
all this Expelled crap evangelical lay people do not have a clue of the
spiritual minefield we place in front of their children. They haven't
heard the stories we have of spiritual shipwreck that happens when they
discover YEC and ID is untrue and turn into militant atheists nor the
gratitude when they have found organizations such as the ASA. They don't
know of the "expelled" in our churches. When my daughter Hope was
talking to her friends and not knowing where I stand their take away
from the movie was people who believe evolution are not Christians.
(Hope ably defended me so do not be surprised if she shows up in your
law school classroom!). They don't know that this is a retread of
history between the warfare model between faith and science and
evangelism:

        I will not witness on the basis of evolution/creation arguments,
because Jesus Christ commands a higher witness in the Great Commission:
Acts 1: 6-8. If someone would like to believe in Jesus but has a problem
with the idea of creation in 6 days of 24 hours each, I will describe
the possibilities that I can accept as consistent with the Bible and the
natural world that we know. I will emphasize the most important thing:
that mankind was created by an all-powerful and loving Creator who daily
nourishes and sustains the human race, and desires Salvation for all
mankind (1 Timothy 2:4). -- Billy Graham

        Thanks for your interesting letter of the 8th:-I can't have made
my position clear. I am not either attacking or defending Evolution. I
believe that Christianity can still be believed, even if Evolution is
true. This is where you and I differ. Thinking as I do, I can't help
regarding your advice (that I henceforth include arguments against
Evolution in all my Christian apologetics) as a temptation to fight the
battle on what is really a false issue: and also onterrain very
unsuitable for the only weapon I have. Atheism is as old as Epicurus,
and very few polytheists regard their gods as creative. -- C.S. Lewis

So, I commented the following on the blog. And the rest is history.
Please pray that God can use the ASA and myself as ambassadors of His
peace.

Hi. I am on the board of the Rocky Mountain Section of the American
Scientific Affiliation, a fellowship of Christian Technologists and
Scientists. The movie claims to do at least two things, one to support
people like ourselves, believers in the scientific community, and to
promote honest and open debate. Sadly, in my opinion, it has done
neither. People line up either on one side or the other and only talk to
their own side.

        Del, you are involved with the Truth Project. The highest
manifestation of this is found in the Ninth Commandment of not bearing
false witness. From my own experience, what is portrayed in the movie
bears little resemblance to what is going on in the scientific community
because the atheists are just a noisy minority. A large percentage of
those who see evidence that evolution is an accurate description of
nature are theists and even Christians. Most of the interactions between
believing and secular scientists are cordial and believers like myself
can express our Christian faith openly without fear of persecution. In
fact, to portray us as being persecuted does a disservice to those
around the world who are truly martyred for our Lord.

        Unfortunately, all the lay people see is the bomb throwers on
either side. Alister McGrath, who was interviewed in Expelled and is
also a theistic evolutionist, calls this the "warfare model" and it is
not the historically normal relationship between science and faith which
is to be at peace. All truth meets at the top because God is the God of
truth.

        What is desperately needed is people who are truly dedicated to
the truth and not just promoting "their side". Believers in science are
caught in the middle and while you think you are doing us a favor, you
are not.

        In order to remedy this we have set places for both sides of the
debate on our website www.asa3.org. We even have commissioned an attempt
to have a balanced and very long review of the movie
here:http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Schloss200805.pdf

        Please also note another review of the movie done by the
apologetics group, Reasons to Believe. Like many in the ASA they believe
this movie has created more heat than light and has made their mission
to bring the Gospel to the scientific community that much more
difficult. Their review can be found here:

        http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/expelled.shtml

        Your Brother in Christ,

        Rich Blinne

        Member, American Scientific Affiliation

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 9:33 PM, Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 5:10 PM, Randy Isaac <randyisaac@comcast.net>
wrote:

Rich,

  It looks as if at least one person wants to continue an "open and
honest debate." I think portions of Jeff's review would be quite
relevant here.

  http://deltackett.com/

How can we convey the point that it is not that doubts about evolution,
per se, are not acceptable but that it is the quality and method in
which those doubts are brought forward. The scientific community would
be extremely interested in any data that would alter our understanding
in any way. But those skepticisms and questions must go through the same
rigor of scientific review and methodology as anything else. And until
they do, the doubts are just that, and not legitimate scientific
results. Most of all, any attempt to insert such claims that bypasses
the normal process is bound to gather pushback.

Randy

Here was my response.

Del, thanks for your considered response. Due to the length I will
address only a couple of points.

"This kind of survey is extremely interesting to me and I would love to
see the data. How many "scientists" hold to theistic evolution,
atheistic evolution, or have serious doubts about evolution?"

A grad student, Whitney Gray, decided to contact the list of skeptics of
evolution from DI's list. He limited himself to the biologists and
bio-chemists. He asked them all a simple question.

Do you believe in common descent?

All but two answered yes.

Michael Behe gave the following more extended answer:

"Yes, I think we share an ancestor with other primates. However, I don't
believe that the process leading to the appearance of humans was
Darwinian."

Clarifying question: Would it be correct to say that you feel we share a
common ancestor and through guided mutations and natural selection,
humans arose?

Answer: Yes, that's right.

Dr. Fred Sigworth denies rejecting Common Descent and recommends TE Ken
Miller's book Finding Darwin's God.

Dr. Dan Kuebler denies rejecting Common Descent and evolution and asked
unsuccessfully to be taken off the list.

Professor Paul Koval said in the many public lectures he has given in
the last 15 years he recalls never saying evolutionary theory is wrong.

You continue, "Then correlate those answers with their various views of
God, the Bible, etc."

The major books that go against the New Atheism are all by theistic
evolutionists (Keller, McGrath, D'Souza, and Collins). Yes, Alister
McGrath from Expelled is a Theistic Evolutionist as well as John
Polkinghorne. Here is what Polkinghorne has to say about evolution and
intelligent design:

"Evolution clearly happens and there is very strong genetic evidence for
the evolutionary connection of most animals including man. ...
Similarly, the idea proposed by some ID advocates that certain
biological systems couldn't possibly have evolved is almost certainly
wrong."

The new Evangelical Manifesto says the following:

"All too often we have disobeyed the great command to love the Lord our
God with our hearts, souls, strength, and minds, and have fallen into an
unbecoming anti-intellectualism that is a dire cultural handicap as well
as a sin. In particular, some among us have betrayed the strong
Christian tradition of a high view of science, epitomized in the very
matrix of ideas that gave birth to modern science, and made themselves
vulnerable to caricatures of the false hostility between science and
faith. By doing so, we have unwittingly given comfort to the unbridled
scientism and naturalism that are so rampant in our culture today."

For further historical information concerning evangelical support of
evolutionary biology I would recommend the book by David Livingstone
called "Darwin's Forgotten Defenders".

You have asked a very important question because at the heart of who we
are as evangelicals is fidelity to both the living and written Word. As
brothers in the Lord we must always challenge each other to find the
truth as iron sharpens iron. So, in that spirit, my question to you is
why do you promote the work of Jonathan Wells who is a Moonie?

Your Brother,
Rich

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology 
 
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.