Re: preposterous

From: Howard J. Van Till (
Date: Fri Apr 06 2001 - 17:32:44 EDT

  • Next message: Paul Nelson: "Re: Functional proteins from a random library"

    Hi Todd,

    You wrote:
    > A further aspect is that what is considered to be a topic of "origin"
    > (a matter for theology or metaphysics) or a topic of "formation" (a
    > matter amenable to scientific investigation) can and does change, such
    > that what was formerly considered to be a topic of origin becomes a
    > topic of formation. And this is when there is some chafing with many
    > theologists. ;-) In this case the problem is not so much semantic
    > confusion as it is "turf war."

    Yes, you're quite correct to call attention to the turf war phenomenon. Both
    sides of the debate between episodic creationism and evolutionary naturalism
    could be cited for turf violations.

    Episodic creationists proceed on the assumption that (1) to call the
    biblical text "the word of God" is not a metaphor but a simple statement of
    authorship, and (2) early Genesis is not only Israel's declaration that
    Yahweh is the Source (origin) of the universe's being, but is also a
    divinely written chronicle of the _formation_ of the various members of the
    Creation. Here, in (2), episodic creationism invades the turf of the

    The rhetoric of evolutionary naturalism often includes the claim that if the
    formational history of the universe is evolutionary in character (requiring
    no form-imposing divine interventions), then it needs no Creator as the
    Source of its being. Here evolutionary naturalism invades the turf of

    The battle goes on.


    Howard Van Till

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 06 2001 - 17:38:13 EDT