NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/talk/origins/16750

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-25 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!tdat!tools3!swf
From: [e-mail] (Stan Friesen)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Gould vs. Johnson
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 26 Jan 93 01:14:15 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Distribution: world
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit
Lines: 28

In article <[e-mail]>, dk@imager (Dave Knapp) writes:
|>
|>    In reading the materials Dr. Johnson has posted here, as well
|> as some others not posted, it seems that his main concern is that
|> scientists are reflexively rejecting any notion that something
|> supernatural was involved in the creation of complex life.  My
|> problem with this line of argument is that it leads to a "God of
|> the gaps" theology that I find distasteful.  This theology leaves
|> room for God only in those things that _cannot_ be explained
|> naturally.  The big problem is that every time something is
|> explained by science, God is diminished.

Of course He is!  That is why I have long since rejected any such approach.
That our approaches are subtly different is not really a big issue, the net
result is pretty much the same.

|>    My other comment is that I believe that those who consider
|> theism and Darwinian evolution incompatible are guilty of a
|> rather profound anthropomorphism of God: they insist that God
|> _must_ behave in a causal, physically detectable manner.

Yep, isn't it amazing that Creationists can never seem to understand this!
[I have said much the same myself, on other occasions].

--
[e-mail]            (formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
[e-mail]