Re: > Re: Defining GOG & EOG

Eduardo G. Moros (
Wed, 17 Dec 1997 13:04:40 -0600

Thanks for the note Andres.

> I agree that evidences of theistic creation are indeed everywhere - but only to the
> believer;

You are in direct opposition with Romans Chapter 1 here.

> the question that science can offer an answer to is simply of what form
> such evidences reveal themselves. I also agree that, as you define difficulty, TEs
> are in a difficult position. However, if science is able to show evolution is
> occurring,

The scientific evolutionary community is pretty sure that they have shown it.
I'm not a biologist so I restrain myself from controversies about details.
But as far as I can tell all of the examples of speciation are trivial
(micro-evolution), or man-made or man-mediated (Intelligent Intervention). So,
we'll have to wait and see.

> then those who subscribe to a theistic evolution will continue the
> christian witness;

I hope so.

> while those who see evolution as a threat to their faith - due to
> a false dichotomy between evolution and creation - will suffer confusion.

They are pretty much confused already. If I were to guess I think that many
are waiting for an scientific breakthru that will vindicate them (and God).
The Genesis ad Litteram position is untenable nowadays just as the
Revelation ad Litteram position would be.

> As for the
> difficulty appealing to the scientific community, theistic evolution is not offered
> as a scientific theory but as an expression of faith; thus, the under girding
> notions of chance and selection are, as in the case of all natural phenomenon,
> incorporated into a natural theology.

And many would ask: Do you mean purposeless, unguided, unintelligent evolution
by God?

> George Andrews Jr.

Eduardo G. Moros