swamidass
August 21, 2018, 10:19pm
8
Eddie:
No, nothing at all. My objections have been against only some of the science/theology arguments made by certain people at BioLogos. But they are water under the bridge; we need to have our own discussions here. The group of people here is quite interesting, and I see the potential of a much better way forward.
I totally agree @eddie . It seems in view to bring to surface a new order to the conversation here. You, and others, have much to add to it. Perhaps the language here can be refined, but this seems like a good recent timeline…
Eddie:
I think Peaceful Science is going to attract people who don’t, and that will be a great step forward in the theology/science conversation. Ancient rage against the likes of Henry Morris and Duane Gish, which has so long been the animating motive of American TE/EC, needs to be left behind for constructive conversation to begin.
I hope we can live up to this, and I agree. Rather than defining us against others, we want to build constructively a new type of conversation, that does not depend on agreement…
The New Atheists said science demonstrates God does not exist, tacitly invoking a false natural theology.
Intelligent Design responded that science demonstrates an Intelligent Designer exists, tacitly invoking natural theology with science.
Evolutionary Creation responded that science does not demonstrate God exists, and became suspicious of natural theology.
Peaceful Science responds that science is neutral on theology, and we need a good explicit theology of nature and natural theology to make sense of all that science uncovers.