Side Comments on Wood's Call for Being Reasonable

[r_speir]

@AllenWitmerMiller

I would like to see us all come together in praising God for the amazing evolutionary processes he wisely chose for his creation

This kind of language does not fulfill “A Call for Being Reasonable”. Please do not censor this comment, but can you see how I personally would view your statement as blasphemous?

[PDPrice (Paul Price)]

@r_speir

Please do not censor this comment, but can you see how I personally would view your statement as blasphemous?

I think it would be best to ignore comments that are clearly designed to goad you into a fight.

[r_speir]

@T_aquaticus

I think this is where Todd Wood’s call for understanding and building bridges would come in handy.

Dr. S is on record here asking me to leave my “YEC idols and follow Jesus”. Is this the kind of peace you are seeking? I cannot be a part of that.

[Dan_Eastwood]

@r_speir

@AllenWitmerMiller

I would like to see us all come together in praising God for the amazing evolutionary processes he wisely chose for his creation

This kind of language does not fulfill “A Call for Being Reasonable”. Please do not censor this comment, but can you see how I personally would view your statement as blasphemous?

Most Christians would not consider that blasphemous.

[AllenWitmerMiller (Retired Professor & Minister.)]

@r_speir

Please do not censor this comment, but can you see how I personally would view your statement as blasphemous?

Not really. Blasphemy is showing contempt for God or dishonoring the holiness of God.

Praising God for the beauty and wonder of his creation is not blasphemous.

[r_speir]

@RonSewell

There is no harmonizing the evidence to support the idea of a young earth.

This is not bridge-building. But more than that, it is overweening confidence in your position and is completely unwarranted.

[AllenWitmerMiller (Retired Professor & Minister.)]

@r_speir

But more than that, it is overweening confidence in your position and is completely unwarranted

It is not unwarranted when God has filled his creation with abundant witness to billions of years of earth history. Why do you defy what God has so clearly revealed—especially when the Bible makes no statements about the age of the earth?

@r_speir, could it possibly be that your “overweening confidence in your position” is “completely unwarranted”? Why or why not?

[Faizal_Ali]

@r_speir

This is not bridge-building. But more than that, it is overweening confidence in your position and is completely unwarranted.

…he said with, apparently, no sense of irony whatsoever.

@T_aquaticus

I don’t see anything in that blog post insinuating that others are foolish for not believing as he does.

I do. And good for him.

[r_speir]

@AllenWitmerMiller

massive consilience from so many fields of science continues to grow exponentially? Considering the sheer quantity of research by armies of scientists, why hasn’t the foundation crumbled? Wouldn’t we expect to see major flaws by now?

You go to far. It’s not “massive”. It’s not “exponential”. The ranks have experienced “crumbling” when a noted personality leaves the ranks or express sincere doubt. And we definitely see “major flaws” in the evolutionary paradigm at least yearly, sometimes more often than that. You have overstated your position.

[deuteroKJ (Kenneth Turner)]

@r_speir

I will call your bluff on this one. I don’t believe you. Prove that this what Todd Wood believes. If you don’t prove it, you need to retract it.

Sorry, I don’t have transcripts of multiple private conversations. I retract nothing. Ask him yourself.

[r_speir]

@deuteroKJ

Sorry, I don’t have transcripts of multiple private conversations. I retract nothing. Ask him yourself.

I just contacted Todd Wood.

Todd Wood, you are a hit on Peaceful Science today but someone is claiming to be your long-time friend - a Kenneth Turner - and is probably misquoting you, unless you truly believe the micro-vs-macroevolution distinction is a “joke”.

It sure would be nice to hear from you, or even at Peaceful Science to clear up the matter. I know you are different in your views, but I think Kenneth Turner (possibly others) have taken undue liberties and read-into your most recent blog post."

I also supplied him the link.

[swamidass (S. Joshua Swamidass)]

@r_speir

I just contacted Todd Wood.

Thanks for doing this. Seems like the most productive way to resolve this.

[deuteroKJ (Kenneth Turner)]

@r_speir

I just contacted Todd Wood.

Great. I hope you post his reply.

Now for some nuance. The most normative understanding of “micro-evolution” is at or under the level of species. So any “evolution” above this level is “macro-evolution.” But the standard modern YEC understanding allows for “evolution” (though they prefer terms like “adaptation”) well above this taxonomic level, including family or even higher. So, by standard definition, YEC allows for “macro-evolution” (look up Paul Garner for some proof). Obviously, YEC maintains limits at some point.

(Interestingly, standard OEC models allow for less “evolution” than YECs!)

[swamidass (S. Joshua Swamidass)]

@r_speir

@T_aquaticus

I think this is where Todd Wood’s call for understanding and building bridges would come in handy.

Dr. S is on record here asking me to leave my “YEC idols and follow Jesus”.

That’s not what I wrote. I discussed “anti-evolution” idols. Many YEC I know are not anti-evolution. Don’t you agree that Jesus is greater than your opposition to evolution?

[deuteroKJ (Kenneth Turner)]

@r_speir

Was this nuance available when you and Todd were colleagues together?

Yes, Todd is quite aware of definitions.

[r_speir]

@deuteroKJ

Yes, Todd is quite aware of definitions.

When did Todd Wood tell you that the micro-macroevolution distinction is a “joke”?

[deuteroKJ (Kenneth Turner)]

He didn’t use the word “joke” for this, but he told me (among other things) that he disagreed with the normal micro vs. macro distinction in 2011-2012.

[deuteroKJ (Kenneth Turner)]

@r_speir

the micro-macroevolution distinction

are you aware that the standard definition of “macro-evolution” is at or above the species level? if so, do you agree that “evolution” includes speciation and then some? (if so, you agree with macro-evolution)

[r_speir]

@swamidass

That’s not what I wrote.

We can find the quote. I would not misquote you.

[swamidass (S. Joshua Swamidass)]

@r_speir

@swamidass

That’s not what I wrote.

We can find the quote. I would not misquote you.

Yes we can find the quote. See here. Note, as well, that I never said YEC-idols. You certainly did misquote me. I said anti-evolution idols:

@swamidass

@r_speir

I repeat, With your tolerance of evolution, you have failed to successfully build a bridge to me and millions in the body of Christ.

When will you lay down your anti-evolution idols to follow Jesus?

@swamidass

@r_speir

Oh no. Please don’t go there with me. On the other thread you just called me an “idolator”.

We are all idolators, even me, so I do not see your point. I’m just pointing out you are declaring devotion to your anti-evolution idol. I found that Jesus is greater. Come follow him.

@r_speir

@swamidass

your anti-evolution idol

Sorry but I do not have an anti-evolution idol. No other way to say it.

@swamidass

When I was serving that idol, it was hard for me to see too. You can know its there because you don’t want evolution and Scripture to be reconcilable. But that is circular reasoning. If evolution and Scripture were not in conflict, there would not be reason to oppose it. So you should be glad to see a way to resolve the conundrum. You are not glad. In the past, I also was not glad. That’s how I came to see whom I was really serving.

One of the clear tells is that you are willing to work with OECs to discuss an old earth as a possible interpretation, but you won’t do the same with Christians that affirm evolution. That double talk it not honest or good faith.

You have the presupposition that evolution is in conflict with Scripture, but that presupposition can’t be found in Scripture. Someday I hope you are willing to trust God’s Word over your own presuppositions.