Re: Faith, Evolution, and Tax Dollars?

From: Howard J. Van Till <hvantill@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Sat Apr 03 2004 - 18:18:27 EST

On 4/3/04 4:31 PM, "William Hamilton" <whamilton51@comcast.net> wrote:

>
> On Friday, April 2, 2004, at 09:45 PM, Sarah Berel-Harrop wrote:
>
>> As much as they claim to speak for
>> a *generic* theism, and that they coyly refuse to discuss
>> doctrinal issues, they are the ones who flatly reject any
>> religious view that does not conform with their
>> standards of ideological purity, which tho difficult to
>> parse, appear to revolve around the rejection of
>> Darwinism (whatever that is supposed to be!).
>
> Hodge, in his book, "What is Darwinism?" distinguished between
> Darwinism and belief in evolution. The distinction was that Darwinism
> denies design in nature, which of course was anathema to Hodge, as well
> as to many (most?, all?) Christians, myself included.

In contemporary ID-speak, 'Darwinism' is the label given to the conflation
of biological evolution and maximal naturalism (sometimes called
'materialism').

Also in contemporary ID-speak, to say that some biotic structure X is
designed is to say that the actualizing (assembling, forming, constructing,
fabricating) of X requires, in addition to whatever natural processes may be
involved, one or more episodes of non-natural, form-conferring intervention
by an unidentified, unembodied, choice-making agent who is not necessarily
God.

Is that what you (or Hodge) mean by 'design'?
Received on Sat Apr 3 18:19:08 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Apr 03 2004 - 18:19:09 EST