Re: Again natural theology (Was Re: The Washington Post "Dissing Darwian")

From: Michael Roberts <>
Date: Mon Jun 06 2005 - 14:32:03 EDT

I totally agree with you David. But one question remains. How have so many
evangelicals fallen for such an unbiblical approach with goes contrary to
the Biblical teaching on creation?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. David Campbell" <>
To: "ASA list" <>
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: Again natural theology (Was Re: The Washington Post "Dissing

>>>I see no difference whatsoever between the conclusion reached by ID
>> and the biblical observation," The heavens are telling of the glory
>> of God; And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands." Psalm
>> 19:1. Both inferences are based not only on the physical data but
>> also on a multiple of presuppositions that are an integral part of
>> the observer.<<
>> The crucial point is that our knowledge of God based on revelation
>> must be part of those presuppositions if we are to make the proper
>> theological inferences from what we observe of the natural world.
> Additional examples include passages such as Job 28, Ecclesiastes, and
> Romans 1 that express the futility of trying to find God starting with
> an examinaiton of the physical world. Another problem is that many ID
> arguments claim that the heavens do not tell of the glory of God unless
> they show evidence of miraculous intervention, whereas biblical
> passages see God behind all of creation.
> --
> Dr. David Campbell
> 425 Scientific Collections Building
> Department of Biological Sciences
> Biodiversity and Systematics
> University of Alabama, Box 870345
> Tuscaloosa AL 35487-0345 USA
Received on Mon Jun 6 14:57:45 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jun 06 2005 - 14:57:46 EDT