Re: [asa] Theistic Evolutionists Clos e Ranks — Let the Bloodletting Begin!

David O. asks:
"What I don't understand is, why respond this way? Why not let a soft answer turn away wrath?"
 
I assume that David is referring to the disturbing words of Bill Dembski. And I think the answer to David's question is very clear. Indeed, I don't think Dembski left any doubt. If the question is "why not let a soft answer turn away wrath?" the answer is "because WAR IS THE GOAL." In fact, Dembski's crazed rage is so unrelated to the actual words to which he is "responding" that I think it's reasonable to assume that he wants nothing more than an "ugly war" and is willing to set aside both rudimentary ethics and basic reason in that wicked pursuit.

How sad that the regular defenders of ID on this listserv haven't stepped forward to condemn Dembski's virulent speech. It's not too late, and now is the time. I'm afraid that Bill Dembski is beyond our help, but those who might look to the ASA for leadership/guidance on how to discuss design and natural explanation, in the context of Christian unity and devotion to the Creator, can be expected to carefully observe our response to the viciousness of his rhetoric.

For Christ's sake, let's make it clear that Dembski's behavior is the antithesis of the ASA's basic values, and that no matter what we might think of the proposals of the ID movement, we will never countenance such destructively malicious conduct in the Lord's name.

Steve Matheson

P.S. David, I'm sorry that you've been called names here, and if I'd been here I would have strongly condemned it. But we're in a different galaxy here, don't you think?

>>> "David Opderbeck" <dopderbeck@gmail.com> 06/15/08 7:33 PM >>>
What I don't understand is, why respond this way? Why not let a soft answer
turn away wrath? The LAST thing the Church needs is an additional ugly war
between two "camps" that really have more in common than not at the end of
the day.

On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 6:45 PM, Dave Wallace <wmdavid.wallace@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/theistic-evolutionists-close-ranks-let-the-bloodletting-begin/
>
> Quote from Dembski:
>
> You know, I would be happy to sit down with theistic evolutionists and
> discuss our differences. I think they are wrong to baptize Darwin's theory
> as God's mode of creation. But I don't think they are immoral or
> un-Christian for holding their views.
>
> It seems to me that in earlier parts of his posting he did question or come
> close to questioning the faith of ECs. Did not people like Ted, Rich and
> other try to have a dialogue a few years back on UCD and get booted and had
> their Christianity doubted, or am I becoming senile. Miller may well have
> gone too far in his attack on ID but Dembski's taring all of us the way he
> does seems very unfair.
> Could someone please explain how if ID is supposed to be religiously
> neutral, this post belongs on UcD.
> Dave W (ASA member)
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

-- 
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.