Theistic Evolutionists also deny that. That’s why they are Theistic. If one believes any life arose through natural processes alone, one is not Theistic.
Anyway, yeah- ID can include Theistic Evolution.
My own denomination (Assembly of God) has Young-Earth Creationists, Old-Earth Creationists, Re-Creationists (the billions’o’years prehistoric world was laid waste in the Lucifer rebellion & the ‘six days’ was God’s restoration of order & creation of humanity to the world), maybe even a few quiet T.E.s. No one ever told me I had to believe in a 6000yo Earth to be saved.
Btw- I’m an Old-Earth Creationist who thinks God may have used some macro-Evolution.
Even Google doesn’t seem to know where that quote’s from, but thanks. I went to Biola, which only gives graduate degrees in psychology and theology, so you get a good number of new seminary students loudly arguing theological nits in the cafeteria, especially toward the beginning of the year. They’re all excited, and at some point they know just enough to be dangerous and impressed with themselves. We used to do the :rolleyes: at them.
Not true. There may be some who do so, but it is hardly the hallmark of Theistic Evolution which only notes that God authored all, but leaves the entire question of “how?” to science.
Theodosius Dobzhansky and Kenneth Miller would both state that all existing life forms (on Earth) arose through natural processes. From the perspective of science, we do not know (and can never know) whether God took an active roll in “encouraging” some gametes to beat out other gametes in the race for reproduction or whether, existing outside time, God simply knew that His creation would develop (at least) the life forms we have discovered. There is nothing in Theistic Evolution that demands the direct intervention by God into the physical world aside from the initial act of creation (whatever that was).
For those of you following along at home, the relevent passage is I Kings 7:23–26. The passage describes a bath thirty cubits in circumference and ten cubits across. That would seem to require a pi value of 3 (circumference equal pi times diameter), except when you consider that the circumference is measured around the inside wall of the bath, while the diameter is measured from outer lip to outer lip. There’s no contradiction here.
No, one is not theistic - one is an “atheist”, to coin a word - if one does not believe in God, and one is a theist if one does. As Der Trihs regularly points out, being an atheist does not commit one to any beliefs other than the non-existence of God; the same is true, mutatis mutandis, of theism.
No, the essential point of ID is that it requires active intervention by God in His creation. A theistic evolutionist, such as myself, believes that God is clever and powerful enough to create a world that works properly first time, without having to come back and tinker with it to keep it going.
Oh, I don’t know. I’m rather amused by the notion of a God who’d sometimes stick His head in and tweak things to make them run a bit better. After all, I’ve tweaked my share of perfectly good code. On the other hand, this does contradict my more deeply held belief that God is not bound by linear time as we know it and exists in all times simultaneously.
Hmmm. I think I’d better not dwell on this and go pick up some trash or something.
Well, if he can exists in all times simultaneuously, maybe he sees our universe from beginning to end all at once, and tweaks things to make them better or smoother or prettier or something. If he sees it all at once, he might have to make changes at any point along the time scale to fit his wants.
And by the way, I just got a picture of God pacing up and down His office in front of His computer, trying to write code that will make that damn protein fold correctly. Quite an amusing image. Thanks!
In a classic example of the good news/bad news scenario, here is my conversation with my pastor:
Good News: I am not going to hell.
My pastor takes great pride in his sermons and when I challenged him on his statement, he denied it adamantly saying that he was referring to only evolutionists who don’t believe in God. I was hoping for more of a “whoops” admission as I think he merely overstated his position during the sermon. However, once confronted, he got a little defensive. He’s human but he refused to admit saying something confirmed by several people I have talked.
Bad News: 6000 year old universe is the only legitimate explanation for all things. Evolutionists are trying to develop a construct that eliminates God. We had a long conversation where I pointed out many findings that confirm scientific theory on origins to which he responded that creation scientists have data to support their, more reasonable, conclusion.
I even pointed out that science can not quantify the supernatural; therefore real scientists can not put forth theories that include miracles. He cited this as science’s attempt to eliminate God shrug
I pointed him to scientific journals where no theory for a young universe has been put forth. Creation scientists, I argued, are circumventing the need for data and analysis by publishing directly to the public and avoiding the inevitable shredding of their theories in peer reviewed journals. He cited Behe and others without even acknowledging my point.
I then put forth the supernova 1987a which proved that light had been a constant for at least 150 000 years (I can find the cite again if anyone needs it). He said that it is more likely that God created an “already in progress” universe. I countered that a) science is then truly following a lie and the idea that “nature gives witness” is an empty verse and b) it is no more reasonable than saying that the universe was created 17 seconds ago with the population and history already in place. He didn’t grasp this at all.
In the end, we left it at we both think we’re right but he claims God is on his side. One more Sunday in the series and he can get back to theology. I will have my work cut out for me as this subject will undoubtedly come up at bible studies and such with the added authority of the pastor on the side of the creationists.
Including Hovind, Gish, and others who have had to lie to make their case? Does God need people bearing false witness in order to get His point across?
Despite Dobzhansky, de Chardin, Miller, and numerous other Christians who support(ed) Evolution?
Despite the fact that Behe denies a 6,000 year old creation?
Well done, Greenback, you may at least have planted a seed. Have you suggested another meeting in which the pastor brings his “creationist evidence” with him, and you get to question it? We could coach you pretty well to debunk the nonsense he’ll bring along, if you’re interested. I’d also be interested in hearing what he’d say if you compared God making false light shows of supernovae which never happened and inserting false iridium layers into sedimentary rocks to Holocaust Denial.
Greenback, I’m really glad that you were able to talk to your pastor over this. I can’t say to myself that I am surprised, and I can’t say that I like your pastor’s stance on this issue (but we knew that already ;)). Everything that he said (as you reported) seems to be about him “keeping you in the fold” (“referring to only evolutionists who don’t believe in God”) but continuing to support his defenseless position.
In fact, the more I think about it, that line (“referring to only evolutionists who don’t believe in God”) is exactly the point that makes the difference. If God will “forgive” you for “believing” in evolution, why does it matter? Why would he need to preach that scientific theory is counter to God’s will? I wonder if, if you pushed him, he would actually come out and say that he does believe that those believing in evolution are “sinning.”
::sigh::
You have your work cut out for you, Greenback. Thanks for fighting ignorance on this topic.
I’m not sure that I have the stomach to bang my head against the wall some more. The main problem is that my pastor’s position is that the data of origins points to YEC and scientists are actively skewing it towards an older model. Truthfully, I really don’t know where to go from there. We’re talking centuries of conspiracy here.
I dealt with any evidence that he offered during our discussion but he dismissed it and moved on to the next piece. tomndebb may be right in saying he is scared. In fact, when I told him that the bible was not a science book he responded saying that “when the bible touches on science, it is authoritative” and followed that up with “the bible is literal and infallible”. I really have no where else to go after that.
So I stand alone. My church teaching things beyond the scope to which I believe the Church was called; creating a dichotomy between science and religion. The more I think about it, the more I think it may be a good thing to write an article about origins and place it in the church newsletter. If anything, it would at least offer another perspective and show that the pastor is not just “preaching to the converted”
Did you mention to the preacher evolutionary developmental biology? It shoots down the argument that God had to have created everything because incremental adaptations over millennia couldn’t possibly have produced wildly different complex structures from the same basic structure.
Irrelevant if the world, being 6,000 years old, has not had enough time to support such incremental changes.
Greenback, I would not spend much more time frustrating your pastor and yourself in this endeavor. Neither of you are going to budge, so friction is inevitable.
In terms of study groups where you might encounter this, I would suggest:
collecting a long list of devout Christians who support evolutionary study to demonstrate that this is not an evil secular plot, (this would include any information regarding the 18th and 19th century thinkers who first began to speculate about an old Earth who were clearly fervent believers and not trying to sow seeds of atheism–Citing James Hutton, and not Charles Lyell, for example!);
(a list of known religious liars and their lies might not be bad to have, although I would not make it the first line of discussion);
and the following statement by St. Augustine of Hippo from his commentary de Genesis, Chapter 19:
(Of course, if your denomination owes its heritage more to Calvin than Luther, you may still be out of luck. Lutherans tend to honor Augustine while Calvinists often do not.)
Does he believe that the Earth is flat (Isaiah 40:22), that the sky is solid (Genesis 1:6) and held up by pillars (Job 26:11) and that the solid rock your church is (hopefully) built on is supported by some more pillars (1 Samuel 2:8, Job 9:6) above an expanse of water (Exodus 20:4, Psalm 136:6)?
No? But that’s what the Bible says. If he’s prepared to compromise on the above facts, why can’t he compromise on the 6000 years? It’s just as inconsistent as reality as the above-mentioned examples of “Biblical science”.
To you and me in our everyday lives? No, not at all. You’re absolutely right. I can’t think of a single specific instance where the belief of several million American’s that the world is 6000 years old has had a discernable impact on my life.
Then again, we need to face three very important facts. The first is that Young Earth Creationism is really, really stupid. And I mean STUPID. Not like, “I hate that new Jack-in-the-Box commercial. It’s so stupid”, but stupid as in the shameless debasement and abdication of both reason and sanity. Stupid as in not believable due to not only a lack of evidence and, in fact, believed in despite evidence to the contrary. And stupid like a fairy tale which would be cute and endearing if believed by a four year old but is frightening and dangerous when believed by an adult.
The second is that these same people use this egregiously stupid belief as the foundation for many other egregiously stupid beliefs, such as the belief that women are innately inferior to men, and the belief that God promised Israel to the Jews.
The third fact is that these people are able, by virtue of the collective power of stupid people in large groups, to influence public policy. Your President, the most powerful man in the world, has to cater to these retards on a daily basis.
And that most certainly is relevant to my every day life.
I won’t ask you to provide the list but could you provide a website that I could go to in order to find and research one? I’m not even sure how to google it.
If possible, same request as above…
I was thinking of that quote but I had not committed it to memory. Thanks.
