[Vision2020] Intelligent Design vs. Evolution

[Michael]

I'd have to agree more with Joe Campbell on this one.

 

Donovan Writes:

 

"To me, it is obvious that evolution took place, and is taking place, just
as it is obvious that it was done with intention and purpose."

 

Me:

But it is obvious to many that evolution did not take place. The issue of
basic "intuition" regarding 'origins' has always been fascinating to me.
Even Darwin himself thought design by kinds was obvious before he made his
'discovery.' Personally, it's hard to understand why someone would, in a
common sense fashion, think that people came from fish, or that my great
grandfather was some slime on a rock (so to speak).  There is also an
enormous problem intuitively accepting the kind of probability involved with
life coming about from chaos--or however it is one must describe it these
days. (Although this last point might be mute for Donovan's
theistic-evolution). 

 

Secondly, not only is it not obvious to current scientific institutions that
evolution was "done with intention and purpose," it seems obvious to most
that the non-intentional and purposeless nature of natural selection is the
very glory of evolutionary theory.  If evolution did in fact take place the
way current scientific institutions claim, then there is no need for God to
explain anything.  It runs by itself, with no purpose, design, or teleology;
'humans' might be ugly brains in vats flying space ships 100,000 years from
now. Donovan would apparently agree with this, considering that God wants
"us to change with the environment."    

 

 Donovan Writes:

" Most Christians that I know, do not take Genesis as literal. I do not see
how anyone could take it that way. To me is symbolic and put in terms so
that anyone, from anytime, can read it." 

 

Me:

I can understand attempts to take the bible symbolically where a literal
reading would seem to conflict with accepted science.  I don't think this is
a good approach, but I can at least understand why this would be done.
However, I do not understand how one could read Genesis from beginning to
end and conclude that a fully symbolic reading of Chapters 1 through 3 is
the most natural. The genre of direct statement of historical fact is
seamless, from creation, through the family lineage of Adam and Eve, to the
history of the pre-flood world. 

 

Donovan Writes:

"It is meant as a spiritual guide to help us toward building a personal
relationship with God."

 

Me:

Again, I am perplexed.  Does the bible itself anywhere speak of its own
nature as limited to or in precisely these terms?  Is this how the prophets,
God, Mary, Jesus, or Paul speak of biblical revelation?  If not, then by
what kind of authority do we decide "how to take the bible," when the bible
itself claims a very particular kind of authority?

 

I did like Donovan's take on the sufficiency of scientific explanation.

 

Thanks

Michael Metzler

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20051102/a673feec/attachment.htm