Abstract
Our first paper presents J. P. Moreland's case for the scientific status of "creationism." He asserts that this approach provides methodologically legitimate answers to questions problematic for evolutionary theory. Stephen C. Meyer and Richard Bube then offer contrasting views on Moreland's position. Moreland wraps up this mini-debate with his response to Bube's strong note of dissent. The place of the philosopher in the practice of science has long been controversial. Whether philosophers should (can?) be the arbiters of what constitutes science remains problematic for the working scientist. Unfortunately, the context from which this discussion arises raises such red flags for evangelicals and the scientific community that polemics rather than reason often rules the day. I suspect that we have not heard the last of this matter.