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

Gee, wonder why Dembski has to resort to quoting old editions of Miller¹s
textbook?

Now Dembski is claiming ³well, they started it!² as if no one has ever heard
of the Wedge Document. Culture warfare has been warp and weft of ID since
its beginnings. TEs have been responding to ID as a result of its warfare
approach. If they weren¹t pushing ID as science into schools this would be
merely an interesting debate among academics.

From the comments on UcD: (I¹d respond there but my comments are always
blocked.)

³The problem with *some* theistic evolutionists is that they are two-faced.
One the one hand they deny ID - that there is any discernable Divine design
or purpose evident in creation (or, at least, in biology). On the other
hand, they turn round and say (when amongst Christians or when talking to
the media as spokesmen for theo-evo) that they believe that there is a God
who is behind creation (ie. they do subscribe to a form of ID).²

Not so. Believing that God is behind creation through well-evidenced natural
mechanisms = TE. Believing that God¹s activities can be detected
scientifically as (undemonstrated) gaps in natural causation = ID. Notice
how the author of the comment above believes that to deny ID = to deny God,
and also misunderstands that ³purpose² is to be equated with ID (and claims
that TEs deny purpose).

On 6/17/08 12:37 PM, "David Opderbeck" <dopderbeck@gmail.com> wrote:

> What does Miller call himself then?
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:33 PM, David Heddle <heddle@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dembski is "sort of" going after TEs yet again:
>>
>> http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/theoevo-vs-id-hey-who-start
>> ed-this-anyway/
>>
>> But not really, because at the 99% level he is going after Ken Miller. I
>> talked with Miller not long ago. He said (paraphrasing) "Even my friends call
>> me a theistic evolutionist, but I am not a theistic evolutionist."
>>
>>
>> So Dembski is bashing TEs‹by using quotes from Miller‹who by his own words is
>> not a TE. It makes no sense.
>>
>>
>> David Heddle
>> Associate Professor of Physics
>> Christopher Newport University, &
>> The Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
>>
>> http://helives.blogspot.com <http://helives.blogspot.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 10:03 AM, David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Right. We all know that the history of "war" in the Church is long, sordid
>>> and sad. Sigh.
>>>
>>> As to name calling here -- yes its different because it's not a major
>>> "movement" website and the name-callers weren't public figures. It's also
>>> significantly different because when I complained to the ASA leadership,
>>> they reprimanded the person and there were both public apologies and private
>>> reconciliation.
>>>
>>> I don't often agree with Ed Brayton, but he's spot on about this one,
>>> unfortunately:
>>> http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/06/dembskis_latest_silliness_1.p
>>> hp#more
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Stephen Matheson <smatheso@calvin.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 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-c
>>>>> lose-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.
Received on Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:58:26 -0700