Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The end of Christianity

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The end of Christianity

    I recently read Bill Dembski's "The End of Christianity," which is about theodicy. Dembski's book tries to explain theodicy retroactively and argues that natural evil was caused by human sin. The effect (natural evil) came before the cause (the fall).

    A bit of a fracas ensued over the book at Dembski's place of employment, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. A professor there named Tom Nettles wrote a critical review of the book. Some dude named David Allen wrote a response to that review in a white paper, with a foreward by Dembski's boss, Paige Patterson. In attempting to defend Dembski's views, Allen includes a striking retraction by Dembski that shows how deeply the controversy went:

    (1) As a biblical inerrantist, I accept the full verbal inspiration of the Bible and the conventional authorship of the books of the Bible. Thus, in particular, I accept Mosaic authorship of Genesis (and of the Pentateuch) and reject the Documentary Hypothesis. (2) Even though I introduce in the book a distinction between kairos (God’s time) and chronos (the world’s time), the two are not mutually exclusive. In particular, I accept that the events described in Genesis 1–11 happened in ordinary space-time, and thus that these chapters are as historical as the rest of the Pentateuch. (3) I believe that Adam and Eve were real people, that as the initial pair of humans they were the progenitors of the whole human race, that they were specially created by God, and thus that they were not the result of an evolutionary process from primate or hominid ancestors.
    http://www.baptisttheology.org/bapti...ristianity.pdf

    Patterson couldn't afford any misunderstanding on these points risking the school's integrity and (probably) angering its patrons. In a meeting that preceded the white paper, Patterson asked for clarification from Dembski. As far as I know, that's the origin of the retraction.

    Since then, Dembski has specifically rejected evolution, denying some of the weightiest evidence for it (e.g., hominid fossils and primate DNA).
    Last edited by whag; 04-27-2014, 11:10 PM.

  • #2
    I'm glad I'm not the only one who screws up thread titles.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      I'm glad I'm not the only one who screws up thread titles.
      Fixed. =P

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by whag View Post
        Fixed. =P
        Yeah, I've tried that before, too -- it only works for the "thread title" of that particular post.
        "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

        Comment


        • #5
          Just to clarify: Paige Patterson is at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, not Southern Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY. Al Mohler is in charge at the latter.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by RBerman View Post
            Just to clarify: Paige Patterson is at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, not Southern Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY. Al Mohler is in charge at the latter.
            Thanks for the clarification.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              Yeah, I've tried that before, too -- it only works for the "thread title" of that particular post.
              Well fiddlesticks.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by whag View Post
                Well fiddlesticks.
                fixed it as it was annoying the stuffing out of me.
                "If you can ever make any major religion look absolutely ludicrous, chances are you haven't understood it"
                -Ravi Zacharias, The New Age: A foreign bird with a local walk

                Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.
                1 Corinthians 16:13

                "...he [Doherty] is no historian and he is not even conversant with the historical discussions of the very matters he wants to pontificate on."
                -Ben Witherington III

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thanks, Raphael.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It would seem William Lane Craig lied when he called Dembski an evolutionist in his "Triumph of Behe" video.

                    http://youtu.be/C8tZxcGJyhM

                    I wonder if it's a conscious attempt to confuse rather than clarify. If it's to clarify, Craig should go back to the drawing board. He's doing it wrong.

                    It does explain why men like Enns and Giberson have support. Their appeal probably isn't because of cultural decay, but because of Dembski's and Craig's horrible way of reasoning through their protologies and teleologies.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by whag View Post
                      It would seem William Lane Craig lied when he called Dembski an evolutionist in his "Triumph of Behe" video.

                      http://youtu.be/C8tZxcGJyhM

                      I wonder if it's a conscious attempt to confuse rather than clarify. If it's to clarify, Craig should go back to the drawing board. He's doing it wrong.
                      Craig actually calls Dembski an ID advocate who believes ID is compatible with evolutionary biology (about 4 mins 30 secs in).

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        This particular video dates back several years. Is it necessarily inconsistent with the chronology of assertion then pressured retraction? (I really don't know.)
                        "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                          This particular video dates back several years. Is it necessarily inconsistent with the chronology of assertion then pressured retraction? (I really don't know.)
                          I don't know, but if so, Craig then needs his own retraction. In any case, Craig's question is either intentionally misleading or misinformed, since Dembski's views stand in direct contradiction to NCSE's views. Obviously, the editorial meant TEs who accept speciation. Dembski never has accepted speciation.

                          It's hard to be a TE if you don't accept speciation. Might as well call Ham a TE for accepting microevolution.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by GakuseiDon View Post
                            Craig actually calls Dembski an ID advocate who believes ID is compatible with evolutionary biology (about 4 mins 30 secs in).
                            Is that meant to clarify or confuse? I would argue it's to confuse, since Dembski is a critic of evolution more than he is an apologist for evolution. The context of the video is Craig's indignation that NCSE wouldn't tap Dembski to win hearts and minds on the truth of evolution, instead preferring actual TEs like Ken Miller to do the persuading.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by whag View Post
                              Is that meant to clarify or confuse?
                              Well, I think it is clearer than your statement that "It would seem William Lane Craig lied when he called Dembski an evolutionist". Craig didn't call him that. He called him "an ID advocate who believes ID is compatible with evolutionary biology".

                              Originally posted by whag View Post
                              I would argue it's to confuse, since Dembski is a critic of evolution more than he is an apologist for evolution. The context of the video is Craig's indignation that NCSE wouldn't tap Dembski to win hearts and minds on the truth of evolution, instead preferring actual TEs like Ken Miller to do the persuading.
                              Yes, that's the point that Craig is responding to: that Creationists would be better convinced on evolution if they hear it from TEs. He is surprised that IDers like Behe and Dembski who believe that ID and evolutionary biology are compatible aren't included for the same reason.

                              In your view, who was Craig trying to confuse by mentioning Behe and Dembski in that context?
                              Last edited by GakuseiDon; 04-28-2014, 03:29 PM.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by lee_merrill, 10-30-2020, 09:01 PM
                              28 responses
                              120 views
                              2 likes
                              Last Post thormas
                              by thormas
                               
                              Started by Whateverman, 07-26-2020, 11:01 AM
                              330 responses
                              6,602 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Electric Skeptic  
                              Started by shunyadragon, 09-09-2016, 03:27 PM
                              1,253 responses
                              55,035 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Tassman
                              by Tassman
                               
                              Working...
                              X