Re: A Logical Inconsistency in the RFEP?

Date: Thu Sep 18 2003 - 18:19:40 EDT

  • Next message: Howard J. Van Till: "Re: A Logical Inconsistency in the RFEP?"

    Howard wrote:

    > Within the limits of the RFEP as stated, form-imposing
    > interventions as the means of actualizing novel creaturely
    > forms could be posited, I suppose, but I would find
    > them awkward at best. All argumentation by proponents of
    > YEC, OEC, ID, or any other form of episodic
    > creationism that appeals to the claim that such an
    > intervention is necessitated by the Creation's lack of the
    > requisite resources or formational capabilities, would be
    > disqualified by the Creation's conformity to the RFEP.
    > If such form-conferring intervention is unnecessary, how
    > would a person justify the assertion that it nonetheless
    > took place?

    This seems radically inconsistent - logically, theologically, and
    psychologically. You appear to be willing to accomodate the Christian God
    just long enough to silence the valid protest of those who believe in Him,
    and then you immediately toss Him out if anyone suggests He actually did
    what you allowed in your concession.

    Your accomodation seems psychologically inconsistent because it contradicts
    your true beliefs, as evidenced by your statement that it "would be awkward
    at best." Indeed, it contradicts the whole spirit of the RFEP.

    If you allow that God is *able* to freely confer form under the RFEP then
    you have absolutely no basis to follow that concession with the statement
    that IDers can never say He actually did such a thing. By your own
    admission, creation of *specific* creatures (e.g. homo sapiens) is dependent
    on *authentic contingencies* and so is not guarenteed to arise under RFEP.
    This means that if God desired a specific form that would not arise from the
    contingencies of the specific fully gifted creation under consideration, He
    would have to impose the form Himself. Your concession says He could do
    that. But your RFEP says that IDers can not say He did it even if He did.

    My argument appears to stand. You can not accomodate the Christian God on
    the one hand and then say He doesn't actually do anything on the other.

    Richard Amiel McGough
    Discover the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Holy Bible at

    Abreviations used in this post:
    RFEP: Robust Formational Economy Principle
    YEC: Young Earth Creationism
    OEC: Old Earth Creationism
    ID: Intelligent Design
    e.g.: exempli gratia
    http: hypertext transfer protocol
    www: world wide web

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Sep 18 2003 - 18:16:17 EDT