Re: [asa] Monkey Trials and Gorilla Sermons

From: Gregory Arago <>
Date: Sun Jan 06 2008 - 04:07:31 EST

Yes, Bowler is provocative to TE's, EC's and non-evolutionists each in their own way. I'm curious: Why do you restrict the ideology of 'evolutionism' to a naturalistic philosophical position? Surely the over-application of 'evolution' as simply meaning 'change-over-time' (and thus giving it a monopoly over 'change,' which is arguably a larger concept than evolution) can happen outside of the category 'natural.' My typing this message that you are now reading, some would say is evolving into existence, while others would challenge that notion, citing 'artificial' intervention. I don't think the liberal/conservative distinction is too helpful for such perspectives.

Steven M Smith <> wrote: he refers to all Christians that accept some form of evolution as "liberal Christians" and those who do not as "conservatives" or "fundamentalists." This can be seen in the quote above.
  The other pet peeve that annoyed me was his use of the term "evolutionism." For Bowler, "evolutionism" was a general term that included all of the ideas of evolution -- "change over time," "common ancestry," and "natural selection." I personally prefer to see that term restricted to the naturalistic philosophical position that "evolution removes any need for and proves the absence of a creator God."

  Steve Smith

Looking for a X-Mas gift? Everybody needs a Flickr Pro Account!

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Jan 6 04:08:35 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jan 06 2008 - 04:08:35 EST