Why I Don't Believe In Atheism's Creation Myth

[AV1611VET]

My point is simply that you deny that God could have created humans by a certain method BECAUSE YOU DON´T LIKE IT!

I won't deny that God could have created us by forcing genes to make copy errors so as to conform their host to the environment, but the fact of the matter is that He chose not to; and even documented what He did, how He did it, why He did it, where He did it, when He did it, in what order He did it in, who the eyewitnesses were, and is preserving that Documentation for eternity.

 

[desimusxvii]

Theistic evolution does not include magical explanations in science.

If there aren't any supernatural elements how is Theistic Evolution different from Evolution?

Really, making this kind of elementary mistake about the subject one is criticizing would let a creationist in for blistering criticism.

Blistering? Oh no! I appreciate your concern but I can handle myself.

 

[sfs]

The point is that science requires critical analysis. Religion holds itself immune to such things.

Some religion does, some does not. I don't take religion to be primarily about critical analysis, but I do require my religion to be consistent with what I can see about reality.

This makes science and religion fundamentally inconsistent approaches to discerning what is real and what is not.

Religion is not about discerning what is real and what is not. It's much more about how one chooses to react to what is real, and how one deals with questions which transcend science's ability to address.

Theistic Evolution fails to reconcile this inconsistency.

On the contrary, I would say it reconciles the inconsistency by accepting what science says about what is real, where science can say anything about the subject.

 

[gipsy]

A God that doesn't manipulate the world? What good is that?

He doesn't manipulate the physical world, only the "souls" of humans ...

 

[Freodin]

He doesn't manipulate the physical world, only the "souls" of humans ...

Or he does. And it looks to us like he does not. Science is myoptic and all that bla bla.

 

[sfs]

If there aren't any supernatural elements how is Theistic Evolution different from Evolution?

It doesn't differ from evolution. It's just evolution when accepted by someone who also believes in God (or even who chooses to trust in God without knowing whether there is a god -- the limits of theism are rather fuzzy). It's a rather stupid name, but it's the most commonly used one.

Blistering? Oh no! I appreciate your concern but I can handle myself.

I wasn't expressing concern. I was trying to signal to you that you really should learn more before making sweeping accusations.

 

[desimusxvii]

He doesn't manipulate the physical world, only the "souls" of humans ...

Oh Lord, the soul is a whole topic on its own. And I think most religious people think God(s) manipulate the physical world. People always thanking him after surviving car crashes and whatnot.

 

[AV1611VET]

People always thanking him after surviving car crashes and whatnot.

Wouldn't you?

 

[sfs]

I won't deny that God could have created us by forcing genes to make copy errors so as to conform their host to the environment, but the fact of the matter is that He chose not to; and even documented what He did, how He did it, why He did it, where He did it, when He did it, in what order He did it in, who the eyewitnesses were, and is preserving that Documentation for eternity.

No, he really didn't.

 

[desimusxvii]

It doesn't differ from evolution. It's just evolution when accepted by someone who also believes in God (or even who chooses to trust in God without knowing whether there is a god -- the limits of theism are rather fuzzy). It's a rather stupid name, but it's the most commonly used one.

Umm, you might want to read up on Theistic Evolution. I doubt ANY religious people think God created physics and the initial arrangement of matter and didn't intervene until humans naturally evolved. I wonder how many times he had to revise the 10 commandments. "Oh, they're reproducing sexually now? Well they better not sleep around!"

I wasn't expressing concern. I was trying to signal to you that you really should learn more before making sweeping accusations.

You'd best not make assumptions. Who knows how my strategy will unfold.

 

[laconicstudent]

Umm, you might want to read up on Theistic Evolution. I doubt ANY religious people think God created physics and the initial arrangement of matter and didn't intervene until humans naturally evolved.

That sounds more or less correct.

 

[desimusxvii]

Don't blame me ... I'm just of the opinion that everybody is entitled to his own believe or nonbelieve and that it's in no way evidently that (some kinds of) religion is preventing people from also being good scientists ...

I personally know religious people that are superb scientists.. at work. But when they get home they shed that persona and believe in magic. As I've said before, to me, this is like a policeman that enforces the law all day and then goes home and beats his wife. It's lacking in integrity. I'd be fine with religion if they'd let go of trying to explain how the world works, and stop trying to undermine science.

 

[desimusxvii]

Umm, you might want to read up on Theistic Evolution. I doubt ANY religious people think God created physics and the initial arrangement of matter and didn't intervene until humans naturally evolved.

That sounds more or less correct.

I KNOW there is no scripture to support such a view. Contrivance to the MAX.

 

[laconicstudent]

I personally know religious people that are superb scientists.. at work. But when they get home they shed that persona and believe in magic.

As long as it doesn't contradict any extant evidence, what is so awful about that?

As I've said before, to me, this is like a policeman that enforces the law all day and then goes home and beats his wife. It's lacking in integrity.

Yes, you've compared scientists who are religious to perpetrators of domestic violence several times now. Please stop.

I'd be fine with religion if they'd let go of trying to explain how the world works, and stop trying to undermine science.

Theistic Evolution doesn't use religion to explain how the world works. We've told you this several times now: It states that God works through naturalistic mechanisms. There is no "undermining science"

 

[Freodin]

I won't deny that God could have created us by forcing genes to make copy errors so as to conform their host to the environment, but the fact of the matter is that He chose not to; and even documented what He did, how He did it, why He did it, where He did it, when He did it, in what order He did it in, who the eyewitnesses were, and is preserving that Documentation for eternity.

By forcing genes to make copy errors... what a nonsense! Your bias is showing again.


Oh, not that I have anything against bias... I am biased, too.

But IF you are biased, then you should at least stay consistent in that bias.

For instance, I think that God sending his angels to kill the firstborn of Egypt is pure and simple murder. But Christians somehow disagree... it is not "murder" when God does / commands it.

And so there is no "error" here. It is God´s way of doing what he wants done.

As for the documentation. I would deny that the Bible - a book written by humans - has more relevance than the creation itself when it comes to "documentation".

 

[laconicstudent]

I KNOW there is no scripture to support such a view. Contrivance to the MAX.

Genesis 1.

 

[laconicstudent]

<staff edit>
Theistic evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pope John Paul II 22 October 1996[ To Pontifical Academy of Sciences


<staff edit>

Ok? And? You asked for a Scripture citation so I gave you one.

 

[sfs]

Umm, you might want to read up on Theistic Evolution.

I might at that. In fact, I might want to do so so much that I've already read up on it, at considerable length. You might want to do the same.

I doubt ANY religious people think God created physics and the initial arrangement of matter and didn't intervene until humans naturally evolved. I wonder how many times he had to revise the 10 commandments. "Oh, they're reproducing sexually now? Well they better not sleep around!"

Well, I can see you've decided to ignore my suggestion that you learn something. If you ever want to know how real theistic evolutionists think (something that covers an enormous range, since it's not a single viewpoint), try asking. In the meantime, have fun making up beliefs for the theistic evolutionists in your head.

You'd best not make assumptions. Who knows how my strategy will unfold.

I'm not making assumptions -- I'm drawing conclusions as I make observations. So far, "merely ignorant to willfully and offensively ignorant" seems to be how your strategy is unfolding.

 

[desimusxvii]

Ok? And? You asked for a Scripture citation so I gave you one.

No no. What does "works through" even mean? Is God causing mutations. Causing selection? Ambiguity + Ancient Allegory isn't exactly compelling.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, he really didn't.

Yes, He really did.