Re: Dembski on the backlash against ID

From: Howard J. Van Till <hvantill@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Thu Apr 22 2004 - 09:04:30 EDT

On 4/22/04 4:09 AM, "Dawsonzhu@aol.com" <Dawsonzhu@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> Has anyone on this list ever actually identified himself/
> herself as a "theistic evolutionist"?
>
I have generally resisted this label, in large part because of the the way
it has been rhetorically exploited in YEC rhetoric and ID-speak. The
standard strategy is first to load the term ³evolutionist² with all of the
nasty connotations of materialistic (atheistic) evolutionism that one can
think of. Then, in the context of that preparatory work, it is an easy
matter to imply that the adjective ³theistic² is no more than a thin façade.
What you end up with is a term that functions effectively as the rhetorical
equivalent of a a buffalo chip coated with sugar frosting. It may look OK,
but the malodorous inner core will not go unnoticed.

My chapter in Three Views on Creation and Evolution (Zondervan, 1999) is
titled ³The Fully-Gifted Creation.² Over my objections, the editors insisted
on using the term ³theistic evolution² on the bookıs cover and as a subtitle
of my chapter. At my insistence, the first page of my chapter included the
following footnote to the ³Theistic Evolution² subtitle: ³Although the
author of this chapter finds this label to have serious shortcomings, the
editors have nonetheless chosen to employ it. The reader is encouraged to
take careful note of the reasons, stated within this chapter, why the author
asks that his position be known, not as theistic evolution, but as the
fully-gifted creation perspective.
   

Howard Van Till
Received on Thu Apr 22 09:07:14 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Apr 22 2004 - 09:07:16 EDT