Re: [NEWS] Press Release: Dembski attacks Pennock...defending Christianity w/o reference to anything Christian

From: Howard J. Van Till (
Date: Thu Jan 10 2002 - 16:08:10 EST

  • Next message: "*****ADVERTISE TO 12 MILLION PEOPLE FREE!"


    Thanks for the clarifications re Schaferman's comments. I have a feeling
    that some of that discussion could have been sharpened considerably by the
    use of David Griffin's distinctions among:

     (1)supernaturalism (the traditional theological perspective, which entails
    divine interventionism -- the idea that God occasionally interrupts the flow
    of natural processes & events and supercedes natural/creaturely action with
    direct/coercive divine action); includes YEC, OEC, ID and other forms of
    episodic creationism.

    (2) naturalistic theism (which rejects the divine interventionism of
    supernaturalism but entails a concept of effective, non-coercive and
    variable divine action as essential); includes process theology.

    (3) minimal naturalism (which rejects the divine interventionism of
    supernaturalism, but is silent on other theological questions); a sufficient
    basis for science as we know it. Says more than methodological naturalism
    but considerably less than maximal naturalism.

    (4) maximal naturalism (which rejects not only supernaturalism but all
    concepts of divine existence or action). Includes Dawkins, Provine,

    Griffin argues that although (2) and (4) disagree substantially on several
    ultimate questions, they should be able to agree that (3) is a sufficient
    basis for the natural sciences.

    Howard Van Till

    PS: I just took a quick look at Schafersman's article at the site posted a
    few minutes ago. I'll try to give it a more careful read to see if the
    comments above (written earlier) still hold.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 10 2002 - 16:22:13 EST