Re: Phil Johnson's Approach -- Provine
Paul Arveson (email@example.com)
Tue, 25 Feb 97 15:00:54 EST
In message <33132766.4B17@imperium.net> Murphy writes:
> Paul Arveson wrote:
> > Once about 20 years ago I overheard Provine discussing ASA; his general
> > comment was that he had contempt for wimpy organizations that tried to
> > compromise and accommodate. He admired the hard-core young-earth
> > creationists
> > who offered a distinctly different scientific description, and had the
> > courage
> > to go against the mainstream.
> Provine doesn't want to have to give serious consideration to
> religious questions, & with YECs he doesn't have to. They are also more
> fun for a person with a sense of humor to debate.
> The question for ASA should be, why would we want to "debate"
> Provine et al? Of course it may get some ephemeral publicity, but what
> is really accomplished? This has little to do with serious catechetical
> instruction (in the broad sense), which is primarily where we can make
> an impact.
> George Murphy
Precisely. I note that in both the scientific and the religious traditions,
debate has not been the primary method of adjudicating disputes. I would
hate to see the day when either science or theology did become this. It
would be a victory for relativism and politics.
Paul Arveson, Research Physicist
Code 724, Signatures Directorate, NSWC
9500 MacArthur Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20817-5700
(301) 227-3831 (W) (301) 227-4511 (FAX) (301) 816-9459 (H)