Why Theistic Evolutionists and Christian Creationists Butt Heads

[SackLunch]

Your return will be welcomed, but not expected.

Well thank you! Yes, I am back.

 

[SackLunch]

Stop playing these games.

Regardless of what members of a message board say, you need to know the reality of things. In the labs, in the universities and in the research centers, "bringing up God" is not part of the equation, ever. Period. End of story.

Got it?

Well I cannot argue with you. This is my point. God is never brought up in scientific circles. Evolutionary science presupposes that there is no God, and our natural world was created only by natural selection and random mutations. So the question is how do theistic evolutionists claim to know Jesus on the one hand, and yet on the other hand believe in and/or engage in scientific pursuits that by default say that there is no God. It proves my point to a tee. Thank you!

 

[SackLunch]

I saw some baboons today. They weren't jumping up and down though. They were just sitting around, picking stuff off of each other. There were little babies (is there a name for baby baboons?) who were chasing each other...but still no jumping.

Maybe every profession should presuppose God having a hand in things. Like Electrians. Say there's a black out. Electrical failure? Something wrong with the wiring? Power surge? I don't think so! It was God. Remember, God made day and night, so turning off the lights is small potatoes for him.

Well it is a scientific fact that babboons jump up and down.

Your argument is a common one. However, in MANY places in the Bible God tells us that He created the universe and the human race directly and instantaneously. Not just Genesis, but the New Testament as well. Evolution theory is not electricity. It is about the same notions of origins and complexity that we see in the Bible. While there is no mention of electricity in the Bible, there IS alot said about origins and complexity.

 

[AnEmpiricalAgnostic]

Does anyone here have a valid, substantial remark in regards to the OP?

People ony feel compelled to offer valid, substantial remarks to Ops that are themselves valid and substantial. Your OP, like the last 20, fails miserably in both regards.

 

[D McCloud]

Would it be a return to the dark ages if modern evolutionary scientists simply viewed their scientific pursuits through the lens that God exists? That we are still free to study nature via the scientific method, yet acknowledging God's creative hand in our natural world? That would not be the dark ages...it would simply be acknowledging our Creator for His creation and studying the world through that lens.

Ok if for some reason unbeknowst to me scientist included the supernatural in their naturalistic studies of science, which god should they acknowledge as the creator, and would they know if they were correct? Perhaps they should acknowledge one of the Hindu religions 33 million gods, or some greek gods, mabey even some Egyptian gods.

EVOLUTION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GOD. SCIENCE STUDIES THAT WHICH IS NATURAL (OR OBERSVABLE), YOU SPOT GOD IN THE NATURAL UNIVIERSE, YOU LET US KNOW.

 

[SackLunch]

People ony feel compelled to offer valid, substantial remarks to Ops that are themselves valid and substantial. Your OP, like the last 20, fails miserably in both regards.

So basically you would like this board to be filled solely with evolutionists with whom you agree?

 

[SackLunch]

Ok if for some reason unbeknowst to me scientist included the supernatural in their naturalistic studies of science, which god should they acknowledge as the creator, and would they know if they were correct? Perhaps they should acknowledge one of the Hindu religions 33 million gods, or some greek gods, mabey even some Egyptian gods.

EVOLUTION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GOD. SCIENCE STUDIES THAT WHICH IS NATURAL (OR OBERSVABLE), YOU SPOT GOD IN THE NATURAL UNIVIERSE, YOU LET US KNOW.

Your argument runs contrary to many of the responses I've received on the subject. I have said that evolutionary sciences presupposes that God does not exist, and many here have disagreed with me on that. They have said that I'm wrong, and that many evolutionary scientists DO presuppose that God exists. So which is it? And how can you explain this contradiction?

 

[Natro]

Your argument runs contrary to many of the responses I've received on the subject. I have said that evolutionary sciences presupposes that God does not exist, and many here have disagreed with me on that. They have said that I'm wrong, and that many evolutionary scientists DO presuppose that God exists. So which is it? And how can you explain this contradiction?

SackLuck "does not take into consideration" and "does not exist" are two different things.

 

[D McCloud]

Your argument runs contrary to many of the responses I've received on the subject. I have said that evolutionary sciences presupposes that God does not exist, and many here have disagreed with me on that. They have said that I'm wrong, and that many evolutionary scientists DO presuppose that God exists. So which is it? And how can you explain this contradiction?

Evolution doesn't presuppose that god doesn't exist because the science has nothing to do with god, and doesn't deny or confirm his existence. NO CONTRADICTION. Why don't you try comprehending what you read.

By the way you neglected to answer the first portion of my response.

Ok if for some reason unbeknowst to me scientist included the supernatural in their naturalistic studies of science, which god should they acknowledge as the creator, and how would they know if they were correct? Perhaps they should acknowledge one of the Hindu religions 33 million gods, or some greek gods, mabey even some Egyptian gods.

 

[nvxplorer]

While there is no mention of electricity in the Bible, there IS alot said about origins and complexity.

Is that right?

Outside of; dust-poof, rib-poof, soul-poof, free will; what does the Bible say about origins and complexity?

 

[nvxplorer]

This is my point. God is never brought up in scientific circles.

Yes, and I can’t get my plumber to give me information on the Chinese space program. Space exploration is never brought up in plumbing circles!

 

[GoSeminoles!]

So the question is how do theistic evolutionists claim to know Jesus on the one hand, and yet on the other hand believe in and/or engage in scientific pursuits that by default say that there is no God.

Because TEs have the intellectual ability, common in most people, to know the difference between a conclusion drawn strictly from scientific knowledge and a theological/philosophical position extrapolated from scientific knowledge.

OKAY: "Science shows that life and the universe are complex. I believe that a divine Creator is ultimately responsible for these observations."

NOT OKAY: "Science has proven a divine Creator is responsible for life and the universe."

The first statement takes current scientific knowledge and uses it to shape the person's theological position. The second statement extrapolates inappropriately.

And of course, Wheaton College, Notre Dame University, and Boston College are all top Christian/Catholic universities. All of them feature evolution prominently in their biology curriculum. Why is that?

 

[MadMansRebuke]

Science is agnostic, it's as simple as that. Scientists who contribute to Science are Atheists, Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, etc. But Science is Agnostic, and it has to be to remain inclusive of Atheists, Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, etc.

Unfortunately, inclusiveness is not a word that computes in the Fundamentalists' English vocabulary. For them, it's six days or bust.

 

[FSTDT]

Evolutionary science presupposes that there is no God,

You are either trolling or being consciously dishonest. Please stop.

Here is the real world:
Theistic evolutionists believe that God reveals himself through his creation (Rom 1:20), and that his creation just so happens to be revealed as change over time. The reason they find this useful is due to the fact that science tells us how things happen, and religion tells us why they happen.

Science has nothing to say about God because "God" offers no testable predictions. Unless you are a troll, there is no reason why you need to be told these things 30 or 40 times.

 

[Dracil]

First, the theory of evolution presupposes there is no God.

And people wonder why Late_Cretaceous made that thread about how debating with Creationists is pushing him towards atheism.

 

[TheBear]

First, the theory of evolution presupposes there is no God.

The fact is, evolutionary scientists get all angry and defensive when the topic of God comes up.

God is never brought up in scientific circles.

I'll let the readers of this thread judge for themselves.

 

[Cassandra]

Well it is a scientific fact that babboons jump up and down.

Not the ones I saw. The Colobus monkeys I saw did a lot of jumping. Maybe you could say that scientist jump up and down like Colobus monkeys? Actually...they jumped from tree to tree...not up and down...

It is about the same notions of origins and complexity that we see in the Bible. While there is no mention of electricity in the Bible, there IS alot said about origins and complexity.

You're going to have to expand on this, my friend.

And you do know that evolutionary theory makes no comment on origins, right?