Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
Call it what it is: Evolution. Not Theistic Evolution.
It seems to me that TEs advocate a theory of the origin of all of life's forms that makes no appeal to God. In fact, they vehemently oppose any reference to God as a player in the unguided process responsible for all life's common ancestry. They maintain that no respectable scientist would ascribe an intelligent cause to the extremely, extremely ordered composition of DNA. They say that God is neither evident nor necessary in a theory of the origin of life and life's forms.
So, where's the theistic part of TE come in? Regarding the theory of evolution, what's the difference between Theistic Evolution and Atheistic Evolution?
It seems the descriptive theistic is totally unrelated to the object evolution. I understand that TEs say that evolution and their faith are perfectly consistent. But, argue that. Don’t mislead folks with an attractive, but meaningless title. Why not have subforums for Female Evolutionists, Libertarian Evolutionists and German Evolutionists? Why not call it what it is: Evolution. Not Theistic Evolution.
The "Theistic" part comes in when we believe that God used the Big Bang and Evolution as a tool. Its a purely theological modifier. The physical theory is identical. I kind of agree though, its a bit redundant. I don't call it "Theistic Evolution" myself, I just say "Evolution".
It seems to me that TEs advocate a theory of the origin of all of life's forms that makes no appeal to God. In fact, they vehemently oppose any reference to God as a player in the unguided process responsible for all life's common ancestry. They maintain that no respectable scientist would ascribe an intelligent cause to the extremely, extremely ordered composition of DNA. They say that God is neither evident nor necessary in a theory of the origin of life and life's forms.
So, where's the theistic part of TE come in? Regarding the theory of evolution, what's the difference between Theistic Evolution and Atheistic Evolution?
It seems the descriptive theistic is totally unrelated to the object evolution. I understand that TEs say that evolution and their faith are perfectly consistent. But, argue that. Don’t mislead folks with an attractive, but meaningless title. Why not have subforums for Female Evolutionists, Libertarian Evolutionists and German Evolutionists? Why not call it what it is: Evolution. Not Theistic Evolution.
Out of curiosity, do you believe in gravity or theistic gravity?
__________________ "There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well." -- creation scientist Dr. Todd Wood
It seems to me that TEs advocate a theory of the origin of all of life's forms that makes no appeal to God. In fact, they vehemently oppose any reference to God as a player in the unguided process responsible for all life's common ancestry. They maintain that no respectable scientist would ascribe an intelligent cause to the extremely, extremely ordered composition of DNA. They say that God is neither evident nor necessary in a theory of the origin of life and life's forms.
So, where's the theistic part of TE come in? Regarding the theory of evolution, what's the difference between Theistic Evolution and Atheistic Evolution?
It seems the descriptive theistic is totally unrelated to the object evolution. I understand that TEs say that evolution and their faith are perfectly consistent. But, argue that. Don’t mislead folks with an attractive, but meaningless title. Why not have subforums for Female Evolutionists, Libertarian Evolutionists and German Evolutionists? Why not call it what it is: Evolution. Not Theistic Evolution.
I agree that the term can be misunderstood. In chat forums where we debate origins calling myself a TE lets people know that I'm not in the Richard Dawkins camp, where I think evolution has disproven God. Evolution is the science and theism is the teleology behind it.
__________________ "The Bible does not lend any moral support to natural selection...Ergo, natural selection is not a process that human beings should support." - SkyWriting
It seems the descriptive theistic is totally unrelated to the object evolution. I understand that TEs say that evolution and their faith are perfectly consistent. But, argue that. Don’t mislead folks with an attractive, but meaningless title. Why not have subforums for Female Evolutionists, Libertarian Evolutionists and German Evolutionists? Why not call it what it is: Evolution. Not Theistic Evolution.
When I'm writing a scientific paper, I do call the process evolution. When I'm describing my position on creation to other Christians, many of whom think evolution = atheism and Christianity = creationism, I call my position theistic evolution, since the combination of the two words conveys important information to them. It's not an ideal phrase, but it does the job better than the bare word "evolution" does.
We don't have forums for female, libertarian or German evolutionists because there aren't large groups who think females, libertarians and Germans cannot accept evolution, or who think that all good female, libertarian Germans should attack evolution.
It seems to me that TEs advocate a theory of the origin of all of life's forms that makes no appeal to God. In fact, they vehemently oppose any reference to God as a player in the unguided process responsible for all life's common ancestry. They maintain that no respectable scientist would ascribe an intelligent cause to the extremely, extremely ordered composition of DNA. They say that God is neither evident nor necessary in a theory of the origin of life and life's forms.
So, where's the theistic part of TE come in? Regarding the theory of evolution, what's the difference between Theistic Evolution and Atheistic Evolution?
It seems the descriptive theistic is totally unrelated to the object evolution. I understand that TEs say that evolution and their faith are perfectly consistent. But, argue that. Don’t mislead folks with an attractive, but meaningless title. Why not have subforums for Female Evolutionists, Libertarian Evolutionists and German Evolutionists? Why not call it what it is: Evolution. Not Theistic Evolution.
TE believes that God is the creator and sustainer of all things. We believe that He is fully capable of supernatural work, yet that He used the natural as the tool for creation. We believe this because God's work is revealed through nature and nature indicates strong evidence of evolution and a non-literal creation story.
Atheist evolutionists regard evolutionary change as random. We regard evolutionary changes as intended.
TE believes that God is the creator and sustainer of all things. We believe that He is fully capable of supernatural work, yet that He used the natural as the tool for creation. We believe this because God's work is revealed through nature and nature indicates strong evidence of evolution and a non-literal creation story.
Atheist evolutionists regard evolutionary change as random. We regard evolutionary changes as intended.
Emphasis mine, I'd simply like to qualify this as being a theological point, not a disagreement with science. God obviously worked through Natural Selection, not in spite of it.
Emphasis mine, I'd simply like to qualify this as being a theological point, not a disagreement with science. God obviously worked through Natural Selection, not in spite of it.
Yes, evolution is a natural system but unlike the atheists we apply Aristotle's fourth cause to it; Telos.
__________________ "The Bible does not lend any moral support to natural selection...Ergo, natural selection is not a process that human beings should support." - SkyWriting
When I'm describing my position on creation to other Christians, many of whom think evolution = atheism and Christianity = creationism, I call my position theistic evolution, since the combination of the two words conveys important information to them. It's not an ideal phrase, but it does the job better than the bare word "evolution" does.
Okay. Then why not call it Christian Evolution or Bible-believing Evolution? Wouldn't that more squarely address your critics. I guess I still find TE a little misleading. I guess I'm a Theistic Lawyer with Theistic Kids and enjoy Theistic Gardening and Theistic Woodworking.
Linear Mode
