RE: [asa] Question for all the theistic evolutionists

From: Glenn Morton <>
Date: Sun Mar 11 2007 - 12:32:34 EDT

This is being posted while everyone is at church. With my wife sick today,
and I exhausted from radiation treatments, we didn't make it to church
today, so I thought I would make some good use of the time.

I have gone back to my roots in school, philosophy and am re-reading much
old philosophy but also reading many contemporary philosophers, and some
whom I should have read then but didn't. What I am doing is preparing
myself to confront the secularism of society. All over the internet, when
one speaks of a christianity which makes any difference to either our belief
about the physical world, or our claims that our religion is based upon
physical observation, that of the empty tomb, atheists and secularists hoot
these ideas down. And that has led to a ghettoization of Christians on the
internet. Board after board, has restricted places where Christians can go
to retreat from the onslaught of atheists, howling about the emptiness of
our empirical claims. They neither allow miracles nor empty tombs; they
deny that the soul is anything other than an epiphenomenon of the material
brain. They deny the existence of sentient beings in heavens out there that
we can not see. And Christians have no real answers to these questions; so
we huddle together on restricted sites, like certain fora on Theologyweb,
Christian Forums or even the web discussion sites of ICR which deny access
to anyone who doesn't hold to their belief system. If we had any
satisfactory answers, we wouldn't have to huddle together and avoid those
pesky atheists. We would shut them up with good argmentation.

So, instead of taking the world, we cowardly, and answerless christians,
retreat from the world. We are the 'contemporaries' of whom Nietzsche

"History is necessary above all to the man of action and power who fights a
great fight and needs examples, teachers and comforters; he cannot find them
among his contemporaries." Friedrich Nietzsche, The Use and Abuse of
History, translated by Adrian Colins, (New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Co.,
Inc., 1957), p. 12

Nietzsche is correct that if one is to change the world, one must rise above
the mediocrity we see all around.The atheists are the ones who are setting
the cultural agenda--they are the men and women of action. It is for this
reason that I developed a new, historical/scientific interpretation of the
Bible, which has, admittedly been widely panned on this list and in many
other places. But being panned, is not proof that the approach is the wrong
one. For future readers, I will point them to

Last month, I asked a question, in this thread. I didn't do too much
debating then, but having just finished reading Collins' The Language of
God, he had an amazing statement in the book that, sadly, I think may be
true and may represent one reason why the ASA has such little impact.

"While many scientists ascribe to TE, they are in general reluctant to speak
out for fear of negative reaction from their scientific peers, or perhaps
for fear of criticism from the theological community." Francis Collins, The
Language of God, (New York: Free Press, 2006), p. 202

My reaction to this, can probably be predicted. If true, I find this to
speak to our gutlessness, cowardice and our denying of our Lord.. Nietzsche
speaks of the man of action, Collins speaks of the man of inaction above.
And it is a sad thing that we are so wimpy. But, to make a comment that
might tie into my previous post on Santayana and Accommodationalism,
perchance the real problem is that once we claim that there is no reality in
the account, we find very little to really discuss with our fellow
scientists? It is like saying, "Hi, I have this nice idea which has no
'reality' to it, but it is a really nice set of beliefs that make me feel
good--do you want to play with me as well?" If we have nothing to offer,
except to say that the Bible really contains nothing verifiable, no wonder
we keep our mouths shut! Leprechauns aren't verifiable either. What kind of
religion is that, which makes zero difference to either our view of the
physical world or our behaviour?

When I asked the question last month, only a couple of people actually
confronted the secularism of our society. We sit on this list doing nothing
but speaking to ourselves, which, if you will recall, I noted that speaking
to oneself is a form of insanity. At the very least, it isn't very useful
and will not change society.

Thus, I will submit again, that unless we put real history and real
empiricism into the Bible (to use Burgy's phrase when we had lunch),our
religion will be not worth a bucket of warm spit. Everyone will look at
that bucket we offer and go 'YUCK!", rejecting what we offer them-- a
chance, like us, to be men and women of inaction.

They're Here: The Pathway Papers
Foundation, Fall, and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Mar 11 11:33:06 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Mar 11 2007 - 11:33:06 EDT