How does one become a Theistic Evolutionist?

[John 10:10]

Pure and simple, true science is man’s ability to understand, participate in, and use the wonders of God’s creation. Unless God gives man the ability to see into the things He has created and holds together by His infinite power, man looks for answers without God, and develops pseudo science answers that are far from God’s truth.

When man can verify to a high degree of accuracy by trial and error that certain effects are produced by certain causes, then man can be 99+% assured that he has found and he understands this part of how God’s creation works.

But God tells man this truth in Eccles 3:11,

“He has made everything appropriate in its time. He has also set eternity in their heart, yet so that man will not find out the work which God has done from the beginning even to the end.”

God made everything appropriate in its time from the moment of creation to the time when the earth was ready for God’s highest creation – man whom God created in His own image. But there are truths about the work of God’s creation that man will never find out, truths that are not important or needed in order for man to find His Creator and enter into relationship with Him.

In what many consider to be the oldest book in the Bible, Job declared this in 19:25,

"As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last He will take His stand on the earth.”

Man’s science that leaves God out of the equation also leaves the need for a Redeemer out of the equation. When Christ our Redeemer stands on the earth, He will not ask us how much science we knew or understood. He will ask us, “What did you do with Me?”

Blessings

 

[lawtonfogle]

Your definition of science is pseudo-science.

 

[Tiberius]

Theorems are for mathematicians and alcoholics

I suggest you actually have a read of the book "The Greatest Show on Earth". He specifically says that "Theorum" is separate to Theorem. Note the difference in the spelling.

 

[Assyrian]

Making up a new word to replace theory is not going to solve the public perception, and we have a good word already. And if he wants to distinguish theorem from theorum why pick a word that sounds just like it? Why pick a word that already exists as a common misspelling of theorem? The high status of theorem is because it is a mathematical proof, theorum seems to be trying to cash in on the status to say how well established evolution is. But proof is for alcohol and mathematics, science works very differently and should be kept separate. At best it is a recipe for endless public confusion between theory, theorem and theorum. You think the word theory has problems? Just wait.

 

[juvenissun]

Why didn't Solomon say that?

Just read one more verse:

3:21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

 

[metherion]

Just read one more verse:

3:21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

But that actually goes really well with the idea that the image of God is spiritual not physical because that IS the main difference... man has a spirit, a soul, that beasts do not, but otherwise they're the same.

Metherion

 

[gluadys]

Just read one more verse:

3:21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

The NRSV translates it as "Who knows whether the human spirit goes upward and the spirit of animals goes downward to the earth?"

This is where one needs to look at the original Hebrew -- and also be prepared for the possibility that the Hebrew is ambiguous and both translations above could be correct.

 

[Mallon]

Pure and simple, true science is man’s ability to understand, participate in, and use the wonders of God’s creation. Unless God gives man the ability to see into the things He has created and holds together by His infinite power, man looks for answers without God, and develops pseudo science answers that are far from God’s truth.

When man can verify to a high degree of accuracy by trial and error that certain effects are produced by certain causes, then man can be 99+% assured that he has found and he understands this part of how God’s creation works.

But God tells man this truth in Eccles 3:11,

“He has made everything appropriate in its time. He has also set eternity in their heart, yet so that man will not find out the work which God has done from the beginning even to the end.”

God made everything appropriate in its time from the moment of creation to the time when the earth was ready for God’s highest creation – man whom God created in His own image. But there are truths about the work of God’s creation that man will never find out, truths that are not important or needed in order for man to find His Creator and enter into relationship with Him.

In what many consider to be the oldest book in the Bible, Job declared this in 19:25,

"As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last He will take His stand on the earth.”

Man’s science that leaves God out of the equation also leaves the need for a Redeemer out of the equation. When Christ our Redeemer stands on the earth, He will not ask us how much science we knew or understood. He will ask us, “What did you do with Me?”

Blessings

But what does any of that mean in practice? If you reject methodological naturalism, how do you propose science be done instead? Should the gravitational force equation be changed to read F = (Gm1m2)/r^2 + God? Should the Hardy-Weinberg equation read p² + 2pq + q² + God = 1? I'm all for giving glory to our Lord, but is the way to do it by reducing God to a variable in an equation? If we believe God to be a constant in the universe, it shouldn't make a practical difference.
You're a mechanical engineer: When you design a bridge, do you design it to be held together with man-made nuts and bolts, or do you assume that God will hold it together regardless? How do you squeeze God into your blueprints? Perhaps science could take a hint from your approach to engineering.
And I don't understand your point that "science that leaves God out of the equation also leaves the need for a Redeemer out of the equation". What does that mean? Science doesn't concern itself with sin, so how could it ever deny the need for a redeemer? I don't grasp your theology, here.

 

[juvenissun]

But that actually goes really well with the idea that the image of God is spiritual not physical because that IS the main difference... man has a spirit, a soul, that beasts do not, but otherwise they're the same.

Metherion

That is correct. So if one studied the body of human and animal, the evolution is a natural (logic) conclusion. But if one studied the whole human, evolution does not work.

 

[juvenissun]

The NRSV translates it as "Who knows whether the human spirit goes upward and the spirit of animals goes downward to the earth?"

This is where one needs to look at the original Hebrew -- and also be prepared for the possibility that the Hebrew is ambiguous and both translations above could be correct.

Even so, Solomon did point out another possibility (human is not animal), which is conformable with Christian doctrine.

 

[The Lady Kate]

That is correct. So if one studied the body of human and animal, the evolution is a natural (logic) conclusion. But if one studied the whole human, evolution does not work.

Why doesn't it work? What you're talking about transcends biology, and biology is all evolution deals with.

 

[Tiberius]

Making up a new word to replace theory is not going to solve the public perception, and we have a good word already. And if he wants to distinguish theorem from theorum why pick a word that sounds just like it? Why pick a word that already exists as a common misspelling of theorem? The high status of theorem is because it is a mathematical proof, theorum seems to be trying to cash in on the status to say how well established evolution is. But proof is for alcohol and mathematics, science works very differently and should be kept separate. At best it is a recipe for endless public confusion between theory, theorem and theorum. You think the word theory has problems? Just wait.

No, it is not really a perfectly good word. If it was, then we wouldn't have people thinking that a scientific theory is just an idea with little to support it. The problem with the word "theory" is that it has several meanings.

I looked it up on Dictionary.com. Here are the relevant definitions...

1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

...

6. contemplation or speculation.
7. guess or conjecture.

The trouble is that scientists mean definitions 1 and 2. Creationists who want to discredit evolution take it to mean definitions 6 and 7.

Theorum was proposed by Richard Dawkins to mean definitions 1 and 2 ONLY. To eliminate the (deliberate) confusion. And he took the effort to separate if from "theorem" by suggesting it be pronounced to rhyme with "Decorum". Read "The Greatest Show on Earth" to see how he explains it.

 

[LightSeaker]

That is correct. So if one studied the body of human and animal, the evolution is a natural (logic) conclusion. But if one studied the whole human, evolution does not work.

Of course evolution works...we're here aren't we?!?

.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Why doesn't it work? What you're talking about transcends biology, and biology is all evolution deals with.

I think he is trying to include the soul, but the problem is the soul is non-empirical.

 

[Assyrian]

Just read one more verse:

3:21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

How is this supposed to contradict what he says in verse 18 that we are animal and God wants us to understand that we are animals? He says back in verse 11 that God has put eternity in our hearts, but notice how he describes us being beasts, Eccles 3:18 I said in my heart with regard to the children of man that God is testing them that they may see that they themselves are but beasts. In ourselves we are just animals, but we are more than that, God has put eternity in our hearts. Verse 21 tells us more of what God has given to us, or maybe it is simply how God has put eternity in our hearts by giving us a spirit that belongs with the eternal God. The writer is looking at what we are in ourselves, just another animal, as well as what God has given us that is far more than all the other beasts.

 

[The Lady Kate]

I think he is trying to include the soul, but the problem is the soul is non-empirical.

Which means the existence and nature of the soul is not covered by any science.

 

[Assyrian]

Except maybe AI

 

[John 10:10]

Let’s assume for a nanosecond that all plant and animal life on planet earth somehow began and evolved without God.

Other than providing jobs for those who believe this is how life came to be, show me one engineering, scientific or medical principle truth that has actually been developed from the ToE that is actually used in everyday life today to build things or help heal/repair our human bodies?

My understanding of how all engineering, scientific or medical principle truths come to be is simply this:

We study non-living matter that exists, learning what makes it tick, learning how to transform it into useful things for the good of mankind; and we study living matter that exists (not existed), learning what makes it tick, learning how to overcome sickness and disease for the good of mankind.

Man may study the past all he pleases and gain much useful information concerning what kind of creatures lived in the past, and man may read the written record of man’s existence on earth to learn how man lived and the exploits he did, but scientific truths are developed in the continuing present, not by the uncertain past.

 

[Mallon]

Let’s assume for a nanosecond that all plant and animal life on planet earth somehow began and evolved without God.

Why? Nobody here is arguing that. We're all Christians here. Those of us arguing for evolution are arguing that life evolved with God.

Other than providing jobs for those who believe this is how life came to be, show me one engineering, scientific or medical principle truth that has actually been developed from the ToE that is actually used in everyday life today to build things or help heal/repair our human bodies?

See here:
CA215: Practical uses of evolution.
Evolution 101: What are the Practical Applications of Evolution?

My understanding of how all engineering, scientific or medical principle truths come to be is simply this:

We study non-living matter that exists, learning what makes it tick, learning how to transform it into useful things for the good of mankind; and we study living matter that exists (not existed), learning what makes it tick, learning how to overcome sickness and disease for the good of mankind.

Healing sickness and disease is certainly an application of science, but it is not only goal of the scientific enterprise. Science simply seeks to discover the material world we live in.

Man may study the past all he pleases and gain much useful information concerning what kind of creatures lived in the past, and man may read the written record of man’s existence on earth to learn how man lived and the exploits he did, but scientific truths are developed in the continuing present, not by the uncertain past.

That's false. Understanding the past is a key to understanding the present. The past gives context to the present-day world. Climatologists will tell you this. Astronomers will tell you this. Ecologists will tell you this. Etc., etc., etc.

 

[John 10:10]

From what I've read, most here do not believe that "life evolved with God." I see nothing in CA215 & Evolution 101 that atributes anything to "life evolving with God."

Yes, we learn very much how to live today from the past, mostly from the written record. Those who don't are doomed to repeat it. But scientific truths are developed in the continuing present, not from how certain creatures who lived in the fossil record past possibly evolved.

We learn most from this written truth from the past:

Heb 1:1 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways,
2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.
3 And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

Blessings