Re: ICR, February 2006

From: Ted Davis <>
Date: Wed Feb 01 2006 - 12:47:50 EST

Burgy's post with the link to Morris' review of Michael Ruse's new book
prompted me to add my own points about Ruse's book.

Here is one of the main points Henry Morris makes, responding to Ruse's new

This supposed relationship of creationism to premillennialism comes up
frequently in his book. However, although John Whitcomb and I are convinced
premillennialists, the publishers of our book, The Genesis Flood (which many
say catalyzed modern creationism), normally publish only amillennial and
postmillennial books. There are in fact quite a few creationists who are
post-millennialists and probably even more who are amillennialists. The
common ground of almost all Christian creationists is simply that they
believe in God and the Bible, not a particular understanding of

My comment would be identical. I also have reviewed this book recently,
though b/c the review is not out yet I won't paste it into this post. My
review will appear one of these days in Isis, the journal of the History of
Science Society. I made the very same point as Morris makes above. Ruse's
new intepretive brush, seeing both evolution and antievolution as competing
eschatologies, is clever as far as it goes; but it doesn't go very far at
all. I had very little space for my review, so I couldn't elaborate this
and other objections very much; but Morris is entirely right, IMO, about
this major flaw with Ruse's book.

Received on Wed Feb 1 12:48:49 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Feb 01 2006 - 12:48:49 EST