Dismantling theistic evolution

[gluadys]

The following post was made originally by Colossians in the Creation and Evolution forum. It appears to be better placed here.

gluadys




It appears we have a few theistic evolutionists in our midst: those who like to invoke evolutionary processes and tack God on for good measure.



We shall easily dispense with this convoluted and confused thought with 10 questions:


Question 1 concerns the motive and fulfillment of your God:
"Presuming your God has volition and desire, and presuming he desired to create, how was such desire fulfilled in allowing matter to evolve through chance mutations? Would you find such an activity personally fulfilling yourself?"

Question 2 concerns the semantic of "creation" and is corollary to question 1:
"How is it that God can be attributed with creating what we see today, if he allowed matter to take its own course?"

Question 3 concerns the assurance of result, and is corollary to question 2:
"How is it that any result at all was guaranteed?"

Question 4 concerns omniscience, and is counter-corollary to question 3:
"How is it that evolution can be said to have proceeded by chance, if the Creator knew the exact result before he began? Would not his beginning the process simply invoke a foreknown destiny, thus pre-nullifying the purpose of chance evolution?"

Question 5 concerns time and is partner to question 1:
"Given that time is irrelevant and a non-entity to an eternal God, what satisfaction did he derive from his waiting for things to take place? At what point in eternity did they take place? How much of eternity preceded their beginning? Given that eternity is undefined, how is it you are sure we are even here?"

Question 6 concerns the pinnacle of creation, man, and the incarnation of Jesus Christ:
"If evolution took its own course, then how is it that man is in God's image? For if that which has formed by chance is in God's image, then God is a necessarily undefined. How could God's Son be guaranteed of a predetermined ministry?"

Question 7 concerns spiritual accountability:
"At what point in the evolutionary chain is a creature considered accountable to God? Why is an ape not accountable? What determines the line to be drawn? When was the line drawn? When the line was drawn, was it drawn unilaterally?"

Question 8 concerns the composite fabric of man and is companion to question 7:
"At what point did man receive a spirit? What was the point of receiving a spirit if he was alive without one? If you say he has no spirit, then how can you also declare that he has an afterlife ahead of him? If you say he has no afterlife, then what is the point of his current life, and what is the point of your debating?

Question 9 concerns your motive:
"What is your deepest motive for rejecting a short, direct, creation, given that such is possible for God to have done? If you say "the evidence", if it were in fact true that God did create in 7 days, how would things look any different?"

Question 10 will sound familiar:
"How do you know there is a God"?

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

The following post was made originally by Colossians in the Creation and Evolution forum. It appears to be better placed here.

gluadys




It appears we have a few theistic evolutionists in our midst: those who like to invoke evolutionary processes and tack God on for good measure.



We shall easily dispense with this convoluted and confused thought with 10 questions:


Question 1 concerns the motive and fulfillment of your God:
"Presuming your God has volition and desire, and presuming he desired to create, how was such desire fulfilled in allowing matter to evolve through chance mutations? Would you find such an activity personally fulfilling yourself?"

What I would find fulfilling is not a guide to what God would.

Question 2 concerns the semantic of "creation" and is corollary to question 1:
"How is it that God can be attributed with creating what we see today, if he allowed matter to take its own course?"

The same way that He brings about His purpose whilst letting history take its own course.

Question 3 concerns the assurance of result, and is corollary to question 2:
"How is it that any result at all was guaranteed?"

God's clever like that. Are you saying that God's not powerful enough to create a process that He knew in fulness of time would produce a self-aware species capable of spiritual relationship?

Question 4 concerns omniscience, and is counter-corollary to question 3:
"How is it that evolution can be said to have proceeded by chance, if the Creator knew the exact result before he began? Would not his beginning the process simply invoke a foreknown destiny, thus pre-nullifying the purpose of chance evolution?"

To an omniscient being, there is no chance. But God no more has to control chance any more than He controls the Lottery. It's chance from a scientific frame of reference, not necessarily from God's.

Question 5 concerns time and is partner to question 1:
"Given that time is irrelevant and a non-entity to an eternal God, what satisfaction did he derive from his waiting for things to take place? At what point in eternity did they take place? How much of eternity preceded their beginning? Given that eternity is undefined, how is it you are sure we are even here?"

Exactly how isn't this also a question for creationism?

Question 6 concerns the pinnacle of creation, man, and the incarnation of Jesus Christ:
"If evolution took its own course, then how is it that man is in God's image? For if that which has formed by chance is in God's image, then God is a necessarily undefined. How could God's Son be guaranteed of a predetermined ministry?"

See my answer to 1,2 and 3 above.

Question 7 concerns spiritual accountability:
"At what point in the evolutionary chain is a creature considered accountable to God? Why is an ape not accountable? What determines the line to be drawn? When was the line drawn? When the line was drawn, was it drawn unilaterally?"

Does it matter? You know that you are accountable.

Question 8 concerns the composite fabric of man and is companion to question 7:
"At what point did man receive a spirit? What was the point of receiving a spirit if he was alive without one? If you say he has no spirit, then how can you also declare that he has an afterlife ahead of him? If you say he has no afterlife, then what is the point of his current life, and what is the point of your debating?

I personally do not think that there is a spirit or a soul seperate from the body. I see what we call soul as being an emergent property of a complex brain. This does not preclude an afterlife; remember that Christianity is about resurrection, not ghostly survival of physical death.

Question 9 concerns your motive:
"What is your deepest motive for rejecting a short, direct, creation, given that such is possible for God to have done? If you say "the evidence", if it were in fact true that God did create in 7 days, how would things look any different?"

There wouldn't be millions of years worth of strata for a start. There wouldn't be a clear pattern in which radioactive nuclides exist in nature and which don't. That's just for starters. It is the evidence, no matter how much you want it to be something you think you can condemn us for.

Question 10 will sound familiar:
"How do you know there is a God"?

How do you know there is a God?

 

[gluadys]

Question 1 concerns the motive and fulfillment of your God:
"Presuming your God has volition and desire, and presuming he desired to create, how was such desire fulfilled in allowing matter to evolve through chance mutations? Would you find such an activity personally fulfilling yourself?"

Yes, I would, just as I enjoy creating a picture by painting it myself or a loaf of homemade bread made slowly from scratch more than items purchased ready made.

Question 2 concerns the semantic of "creation" and is corollary to question 1:
"How is it that God can be attributed with creating what we see today, if he allowed matter to take its own course?"

In the same way as God can be credited with accomplishing his purposes through human activity freely undertaken in response to his call. Modern science has shown that the actions of matter are somewhat indeterminate and subject to the contingent influences of small differences in initial conditions---in short, in some sense, matter enjoys a degree of freedom, rather than being locked into a deterministic framework. This allows matter to respond to God's call (set out perhaps in those initial conditions).

Question 3 concerns the assurance of result, and is corollary to question 2:
"How is it that any result at all was guaranteed?"

A result is always guaranteed. What is not guaranteed is that it is the result we know occurred. We know who won a lottery after the winning ticket is drawn, not before. But even before the ticket is drawn we know there will be a winner.

Question 4 concerns omniscience, and is counter-corollary to question 3:
"How is it that evolution can be said to have proceeded by chance, if the Creator knew the exact result before he began? Would not his beginning the process simply invoke a foreknown destiny, thus pre-nullifying the purpose of chance evolution?"

Although parts of its mechanism rely on random events, evolution per se does not proceed by chance.

Question 5 concerns time and is partner to question 1:
"Given that time is irrelevant and a non-entity to an eternal God, what satisfaction did he derive from his waiting for things to take place? At what point in eternity did they take place? How much of eternity preceded their beginning? Given that eternity is undefined, how is it you are sure we are even here?"

Evolution takes place in time, not eternity. God may view it from the aspect of eternity. In that case, it makes no sense to speak of God waiting for things to take place. Waiting applies to time. One might just as well ask what satisfaction God derived or derives from waiting for Jesus to be born or waiting for Jesus to return.

Question 6 concerns the pinnacle of creation, man, and the incarnation of Jesus Christ:
"If evolution took its own course, then how is it that man is in God's image? For if that which has formed by chance is in God's image, then God is a necessarily undefined. How could God's Son be guaranteed of a predetermined ministry?"

God is a spirit and the image of God is spiritual and spiritually, not physically, defined.

Question 7 concerns spiritual accountability:
"At what point in the evolutionary chain is a creature considered accountable to God? Why is an ape not accountable? What determines the line to be drawn? When was the line drawn? When the line was drawn, was it drawn unilaterally?"

When it has the cognitive and moral capacity to be accountable. Is an ape not accountable? How do we know this? Is that not between God and the ape?

Question 8 concerns the composite fabric of man and is companion to question 7:
"At what point did man receive a spirit? What was the point of receiving a spirit if he was alive without one? If you say he has no spirit, then how can you also declare that he has an afterlife ahead of him? If you say he has no afterlife, then what is the point of his current life, and what is the point of your debating?

The Hebrew term for spirit has several meanings including "breath". So in one sense, all creatures which breathe have spirit. In the more theological sense, humanity received spirit when God gave it. Skeletal evidence is insufficient to determine when that was, but it may be marked by indications of spiritual awareness in cultural artifacts and behaviour such as the ceremonial burial of the dead. Physical life is endowed with breath. Spiritual life is endowed with spirit. Hebrew uses the same word for both "breath" and "spirit" (and also "wind") and so is ambiguous on this point.

Question 9 concerns your motive:
"What is your deepest motive for rejecting a short, direct, creation, given that such is possible for God to have done? If you say "the evidence", if it were in fact true that God did create in 7 days, how would things look any different?"

My belief that the God who created the universe is the God of the bible, the God revealed to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the people of Israel, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is a God of Truth and of cosmic orderliness.

Hence it follows that creation is real (not an illusion), that our perceptions of creation are real (God did not give us perception in order to deceive us, and with a few limitations and exceptions, what you see is real--especially when the perception is inter-subjective), that creation is comprehensible (as it must be to witness to God's eternal majesty and power), and creation does not lie to us (since it comes directly from God, unlike scripture which is mediated through human minds, and the interpretations of scripture which are fully grounded in fallible human reasoning.)

In short, evidence.

A 7 day creation would show all species existing in the same time frame-work. Creation does not show this, but rather shows distinct populations existing in distinct times. In a 7 day recent creation, all radio-active elements would still exist in nature, but in reality only those which have a long half-life exist in nature unless there is a mechanism to renew it.

There would be other differences as well, but that is enough to begin with.

Question 10 will sound familiar:
"How do you know there is a God"?

Via a personal relationship with God.

 

[seebs]

One can only imagine the dialogue.

A: It's insulting!
B: It misses the point!
A: No, it's insulting!
B: No, it misses the point!
C: Guys guys. It's insulting and it misses the point!

 

[Vance]

The ultimate problem with every one of those questions is that they anthropomorphize God and bring Him down to our puny level. This is ironic since it is the YEC's who say that TE's don't give God a large enough role in Creation. The truth is that they have trouble realizing that God is ultimately SO FAR beyond our comprehension that it is just silly for us to ask the "why's". He's GOD.

It is like my son, back when he was two, trying to understand my job as an estate planning attorney. No, that is even too close. More like my DOG trying to understand it.

God told us what we need to know for salvation, which are the truths contained in Genesis. We can also figure out the skeletal outline of how and when He did things through the study of His creation itself. But to think that we can fathom the infinite power and wisdom of the creator of "life, the universe and everything" is a bit hubristic.

(and no, the answer is probably not 42). :0)

 

[bluejeans]

I am a yec,and I didn't say TE's don't give God a large enough role.
I know better than that. No one can stop God,and no one controls God.
I think that would be giving a TE way too much credit,as it would be to
anyone who ever made such a silly claim.
In the end,only God's opinion will really matter,so it should start to matter
now would most agree?

 

[bluejeans]

Jesus Christ is Lord of all,amen.
Every knee shall bow to him one day!