RE: Science/religion article featuring Bill Phillips

From: Woodward Norm Civ WRALC/TIEDM (
Date: Fri Oct 26 2001 - 16:33:35 EDT

  • Next message: bivalve: "Proabbility from What does the creation lack?"

    -----Original Message-----
    From: []
    Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 2:22 PM
    Subject: Science/religion article featuring Bill Phillips

    There's an interesting article in the Washington Times about a recent
    science/religion conference at Harvard. It is at:

    At the beginning of the article, and then again near the end, are some wise
    comments from 1997 Physics Nobelist Bill Phillips, keynote speaker at an ASA
    Conference a few years ago. I particularly liked this observation which
    gets at one of the problems many of us have with what George M. would call
    "independent natural theology":

    "Let's imagine we do learn a lot more, and it is really pointing us to the
    idea of a Creator," Mr. [sic] Phillips said. "It's difficult to see how that
    will point to a Creator who wants a personal relationship with us, who loves
    us, who wants us to love each other, who has expectations for us that come
    to us by the wisdom of Scriptures."

    Allan Harvey,


    And, of course, that is a correct statement.

    I believe that the Scriptures has promised that anyone closely observing the
    World will eventually confirm a Creator. However, it should not be left to
    science to disclose His attributes.

    So, it behooves those who hope to convince a scientist that our
    (Judeo-Christian) God is the God of Creation, that they be able to show how
    the Biblical Creation story jibes with the observed data. Then the
    scientist can feel comfortable accepting the "rest of the story."

    However, I found another quote more germane to an interest of mine.
    Dr/Mr./Rev Peacocke asked "Can religion learn to outgrow its reliance on
    claimed authorities and popular images of a God who acts and reveals by
    supernatural means?"

    I found this interesting because I have been asking myself, and others, is
    "Theistic Evolution" actually "theistic" or is it "deistic?"

    And I have received some interesting responses, both externally and
    internally. And one of the responses, that I received from an OEC mentor,
    was to check you guys out.

    If you would, please respond to my question. I will be away for the
    week-end, but I would like to see your comments, and to share my


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Oct 26 2001 - 16:34:23 EDT