Re: [asa] Response to Baylor meeting

Randy cites his correspondent implying that the reason Christian scientists "want so much" to believe that evolution is a correct scientific description of God's creative activity is to gain "respectabliity". Sadly, this sort of slander against the integrity of fellow Christians is not uncommon. Phil Johnson has done it more than once, basically saying that Christians in academia only express belief in evolution for career advancement purposes. It has happened on this ASA list a few times.

I realize this person is not a part of our list, but this attitude is outside the "Guidelines" Randy posted just a day or two ago. While I hate to "write off" anybody, I think the ASA response to a person like this may need to be shaking the dust off our feet. If this person disputes the evidence for evolution, we can talk about that. If he thinks evolution is incompatible with his Christian theology, we can talk. But if the tactic he leads with is to impugn the motives and integrity of Christians who believe common descent to be true, I don't know that edifying conversation is possible.

Allan Harvey (ASA member)

P.S. Glad to see Pete Enns on the list -- if more Evangelicals took to heart the wisdom in his excellent book "Inspiration and Incarnation" many of the church's problems in the science/faith area would be greatly diminished (along with the damage done to the witness of the Gospel among the scientifically literate).

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Aug 30 20:03:01 2009