RE: conservative writers and evolution

From: glenn morton (
Date: Mon Nov 13 2000 - 13:17:37 EST

  • Next message: Blaine D. McArthur: "Re: conservative writers and evolution"

    Inge wrote:

    > I find it interesting if Warfield supported evolution, because his defense
    > of the total inerrancy of the Bible has had a major influence on American
    > evangelical theologians.

    Ted did inform me that all were active at the turn of last century. To me
    this in some sense emphasizes the point I was making with Burgy. Today there
    are apparently no writers who believe in inerrancy or historicity who accept
    both evolution and the age of the earth. The fact that their used to be a
    few (and I might note that this is not a large number) is quite interesting
    in light of where Christendom seems to be today. For accepting evolution, I
    have been called an apostate, a heretic the son of Satan etc. It seems that
    those with whom I agree with on the historicity issue are less than thrilled
    with my acceptance of evolution. I think today I am the only one writing who
    accepts the historicity of early Genesis, evolution and the age of the
    earth. (so that there is no misunderstanding by historicity I don't mean a
    story that became inflated and filled with false details leaving only a germ
    of truth. To me that is not a historical tale as is obvious from the recent
    discussions.) If anyone knows of another who accepts all those things I
    would like to know. Dick Fischer comes close, but I don't think I would
    include Dick Fischer here. This is because if the Bible and Sumerian texts
    disagree, Dick goes with the Sumerians every time as far as I can tell,
    meaning that the Bible has the wrong details once again.


    for lots of creation/evolution information

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Nov 13 2000 - 13:16:46 EST