RE: [asa] Greetings - An introduction

From: Ted Davis <TDavis@messiah.edu>
Date: Wed Sep 10 2008 - 09:38:38 EDT

This very much depends, Dick, on how one defines the PC view. From my
perspective as an historian of science and religion, I prefer to define a TE
as someone who accepts common descent even for humans (at least for the
human body), and a PC as someone who does not accept human evolution but
does accept an old earth and life/death long before humans. Someone else's
definitions might differ, obviously; there is no monopoly on such
definitions.

Using these definitions, however, I consider James Dana to have been a PC.
He never accepted human evolution, but he did accept a whole lot of
macroevolution. There have been others in this category also. Ross of
course affirms millions of acts of separate creation through the historical
periods. Dana was in a very different place from Ross.

Ted

>>> "Dick Fischer" <dickfischer@verizon.net> 9/9/2008 8:19 PM >>>
Hi George:
 
Anybody correct me if I'm wrong, but human evolution is only one RTB
rejection. Progressive Creationists reject mutual, shared, common
ancestry for existing species altogether. No links between horses and
zebras for one glaring example. And the genetic distance between horses
and zebras is greater than between humans and chimps.
 

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Sep 10 09:40:14 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Sep 10 2008 - 09:40:14 EDT