Re: [asa] Where does TE differ from NOMA? (was: Re: Schools and NOMA)

From: Keith Miller <>
Date: Thu Nov 05 2009 - 20:46:45 EST


I will not respond to your post except to say that science gives us only a
limited understanding of nature. We absolutely cannot have a complete
understanding of nature without understanding it as creation. Science is a
very powerful way of knowing, but the knowledge it provides is very narrow
and constrained. It is not just that science cannot address questions of
morality and ethics, but that it cannot fully grasp physical reality. That
reality is much bigger than what is accessible to scientific inquiry because
God is acting in and through it to accomplish God's purposes, and it depends
absolutely on God's continuing sustaining work. The most powerful aspect of
physical reality is that it is creation.

BTW: The focus by the ID movement on science, and evolution in particular,
was definitely a tactical decision. Phil Johnson who was the founder of the
ID movement made that quite explicit. The activities at the local level are
almost entirely political in nature -- there is a reason why both Phil
Johnson and John Calvert (the founder of the IDnet) are lawyers not
scientists. Nearly all local activity of the ID movement (supported by the
Discovery Institute and the ID leadership) concerns elections, legislation,
and legal action. If you really want to understand the practical reality
of the ID movement you must become aware of this political and social

All the best,


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 5 20:47:07 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 05 2009 - 20:47:07 EST