ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ

Tomasky thinks the statement about dinosaurs living alongside man is wacko stuff. He hasn't been around creationists too much then. It gets so much more wacko that it's roaringly laughable the moment creationists talk about what T-rex' diet was prior to the all. Since the bible says something that the lord provided the greens for ALL animals to eat, many creationists hold that T-rex too was vegetarian prior to the fall. And those enormous teeth? They were supposedly for cracking open coconuts that formed the staple of its diet prior to the fall.

Right.

It may not have come up because Obama and McCain are both on record as agreeing with evolution, so there was probably little to be gained from a creationist raising the issue. Warren is a typical evangelical: in the land of Evangelicalism, there isn't much free thought about these things and certainly very little in the way of dissent from the creationist position on the issue. Warren just hasn't thought about it hard enough, and if the pressure to be the definition of evangelical wasn't bearing upon him I'd venture to say he'd probably study the topic for himself and come to a very different conclusion.

(Then it would snowball: he'd be like the bishop in that episode of Father Ted who, after talking with Father Dougall for a while, decides the whole faith is nonsense and decides to resign the priesthood, the final scene showing him dressed as a hippie, smoking a joint and leaving in a VW bus to tour the world.)

John

I'm not sure why you think that there is little freedom of thought on the evolution issue in Evangelicalism. Certainly academics like Bruce Waltke and Tremper Longman, at Reformed Theological Seminary and Westminster Theological Seminary in the States, argue that Genesis ch1 has nothing to teach us about the science of origins. These seminaries are as conservative as it gets in Evangelical circles. I could multiply examples from conservative Evangelical Seminaries.
It's also worth pointing out that one of the "godfather's" of Protestant fundamentalism BB Warfield, was a committed Darwinist. See David Livingstone's book "Darwin's Forgotten Defenders".

GV

THE fundamental assertion of the Biblical doctrine of the origin of man is that he owes his being to a creative act of God

β€œevolution” cannot act as a substitute for creation

B.B. Warfield

Puritan
So are you disagreeing with me? Or just saying that evolution cannot be the whole story?
Be careful not to identify Darwinism and Evolution. In Warfields day the two were not synonymous.

GV

PK
You are dodging the central issue - did Adam have a belly button?

I should also confess that I was just trying to start an argument with you on the Dawkins thread.
I'll cheerfully concede that religious convictions do not predict Scientific achievement.
I was hoping you'd try to use that as an argument against religion. Serves me right that you weren't drawn in.

GV

Graham says: "I'm not sure why you think that there is little freedom of thought on the evolution issue in Evangelicalism."

Because there are 420 million evangelicals and I'd venture to guess that less than half a percent of them believe in evolution.

A lot of research went into that then.

At the conservative Seminaries in the States there's freedom of thought. That's where the pastor's train, and the theologies are produced.

I would note one setback- the appointment of Kurt Wise at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. That surprised a lot of outsiders.

G Veale

Graham- Was that sarcasm? You don't have to take my word for it: go and poll evangelicals randomly to find out if they are aware of the research proving evolution from the evidence of the ancestral fusion in human chromosome #2, or if they've thought about the problems with believing that the earth is only thousands of years old -- in fact just ask them the question, "How old is the earth?" and you'll have your answer in seconds. In my thorough experience of evangelicalism both in Ireland and here in the United States, my assertion that "there isn't much free thought about these things" isn't merely true but a considerable understatement.

No I'm not being sarcastic. I'll go organise a poll right away.
Or maybe your anecdotal evidence is enough. I mean, what do all those books and journal articles count for anyway?

G Veale