Re: Question

From: george murphy (
Date: Wed Mar 28 2001 - 09:03:31 EST

  • Next message: george murphy: "Re: Fw: Question" wrote:

    > In a message dated 3/26/01 5:56:11 PM, writes:
    > << & a footnote to Howard's 2d footnote: Further statements by scientists
    > such as
    > Simpson that therefore evolution is incompatible with Christianity carry very
    > little weight. I am amused when Christian anti-evolutionists cite such
    > statements approvingly, as if Simpson et al were expert theologians. >>
    > George,
    > The quotation undoubtedly carries little weight among expert theologians such
    > as you. Simpson's book, however, was not written for such experts, but as a
    > popular book for the reading public to explain and perhaps popularize
    > Darwinian evolution. This would include many scientists who, while being
    > experts in their own specialized field of research, may not be specialists in
    > evolution, and need to rely on world-class paleontologists, such as Simpson,
    > for their understanding of the meaning of evolution. I understand the book
    > was widely read. I have done no research on the problem, but I suspect the
    > book and its quotation may have played an important role in the acceptance of
    > evolution by many opinion leaders in the reading public in the middle of last
    > century. It is naive to think that the theological opinions of scientists
    > such as Simpson don't carry weight outside the circle of professional
    > theologians just because the professionals discount them.

            Certainly, but my point wasn't that statements such as those of Simpson
    should be ignored.
    It is relevant to cite such statements as evidence of the way some scientists &
    philosophers have tried to use evolution to further their own anti-religious
    agenda. But it's quite another matter to cite Simpson, Huxley, Dawkins, &c as if
    their statements carried some theological weight. E.g., in Wilbert H. Rusch
    Sr.'s _Origins: What Is At Stake?_ (Creation Research Society, 1991), there is
    the following criticism of theistic evolution.
            "Interestingly enough, I have found that in my experience theistic
    evolution is unacceptable to many scientists. The thinking of Huxley, which
    views _any_ coexistence of Christianity and evolution as completely impossible,
    is still current today."
            As far as the logic of the argument is concerned, a sufficient answer to
    this is, "So?"



    George L. Murphy
    "The Science-Theology Interface"

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 28 2001 - 09:00:12 EST