Is Belief in a creator God compatible with evolutionary Naturalism?

[WASR10]

Evolutionary theory explains speciation via natural means, so it is necessarily falls within the philosophy of naturalism (as does all scientific theory really). The error in in the OP is requiring that evolutionary theory also require naturalism in abiogenesis. That is an entirely independent concept which has no generally accepted scientific explanation. For people of faith who don't take the Bible literally, for example those treating Genesis as allegory, it doesn't automatically follow that belief in the Christian God precludes evolution driving the diversity of life.

Very well stated.

Sent from my tappy device thingy

[bohoki]

it has to be mutually exclusive

everything created should be static and have a purpose

if not you have to use occam's razor and thus the creator idea would become more complex than the competing explanation

[Badmusic]

I've had this discussion many times.

Science has proven there have been many things living on the planet before Man showed up - even cave man. So much for Creationism.

"Science" has proven no such thing. Scientists have interpreted "evidence" in such a manner as to suggest a specific timeline exists, however, the evidence can also be interpreted to suggest other conclusions. It is all dependent upon one's worldview.

Do you think NASA made all these fossils found across the globe to put in museums?

What does a government space exploration agency have to do with paleontology?? You make no senses here.

Animals Man has never seen before? Name the pre-historic species that we get to look at today, plants, birds or reptiles.

Wait...what??

[Badmusic]

Look up "The Big Bag Theory", scientist have proven we started from a primeval atom or the "Cosmic Egg"'.

Now I ask what came 1st the Chicken or the Egg???

And I ask you if you know what "ex nihilo, nihil fit" means?

[Badmusic]

The theory of evolution is not meant to explain the origin of life. It explains changes in species over time. Evolution can be proved by the scientific method. That is why it is so widely accepted as much as gravity is a theory.

The problem with your attempt here to make an argument against the meaning of "evolution" is that you miss the point. Yes, evolution describes the processes of speciation, but you conveniently forget that your definition is dependent upon presuppositions about the nature of nature so to speak...it depends upon the universe being uncreated. "Evolution", ALWAYS is described in terms of NATURAL processes. How can one claim it is a NATURAL process, if the SUPERNATURAL was/is involved? The narrative of evolution and secular big bang cosmology go hand in hand. If as you say, evolution does not explain the origin of life, what does? You see, the moment you decide to separate evolution from the physical world from which it sprung without explaining the origin of said physical world, you have arrived at simple speculation, and your definition of 'evolution' becomes meaningless. To say God created the physical world from which evolutionary processes derive, is to say "God CREATED...", and you no longer have Evolution, as Evolution is always described in Natural terms, the Natural excludes the Supernatural by DEFINITION.


Again folks... here's the rub...if you believe that Evolution and creation are compatible, then you have the burden of proof, by describing the specifics of this evolution and it's processes, by showing how the supernatural made the natural, without involving the supernatural. That is irrational. One, to remain rational, must believe EITHER in God's creative acts, OR not believe in God's creative acts. Logic and the laws of reason demand this distinction.

[Badmusic]

Here is the most simple way I can describe the challenge for those that disagree with my argument...(I.E. those who believe Evolution and God are compatible philosophical ideas)


Describe for me, an evolutionary system and it's process, that DOES NOT presuppose NATURAL processes only, without making it an act of creation.

EX: How did sexual reproduction originate? Or, How did multicellular life and it's interdependent systems originate? (from single celled life) How did the first living cell originate?

Remember, your descriptive terms must presuppose God's existence. I'd say good luck, but I don't believe in luck.

[Just Dave]

Here is the most simple way I can describe the challenge for those that disagree with my argument...(I.E. those who believe Evolution and God are compatible philosophical ideas)


Describe for me, an evolutionary system and it's process, that DOES NOT presuppose NATURAL processes only, without making it an act of creation.

EX: How did sexual reproduction originate? Or, How did multicellular life and it's interdependent systems originate? (from single celled life) How did the first living cell originate?

Remember, your descriptive terms must presuppose God's existence. I'd say good luck, but I don't believe in luck.

Some folks try to mix the word of God with man's philosophy.

Here's something to ponder.
If man evolved over millions of years from a lower form of life where is the evidence of this lower form's existence?
Shouldn't we be up to our elbows in millions of years worth of bones?
Given the rate that animals/humans multiply we should have millions of years worth of skeletal evidence to back these evolutionary claims up but we don't.

[Oceanbob]

Some folks try to mix the word of God with man's philosophy.

Here's something to ponder.
If man evolved over millions of years from a lower form of life where is the evidence of this lower form's existence?
Shouldn't we be up to our elbows in millions of years worth of bones?
Given the rate that animals/humans multiply we should have millions of years worth of skeletal evidence to back these evolutionary claims up but we don't.

Dave....perhaps you have no understanding of the many Sciences and discoveries that prove an old earth and yes, even evolution.

This lack of understanding doesn't mean a magical god of a tribe of remote people created the vast Cosmos by speaking it into existence my friend.

Look back time proves a very old planet; the mapping of the genome proves evolution. Among other things.

This sand found on the beach is made up almost entirely of the exoskeletons of ancient tiny creatures. From long, long ago.

The evidence is there.

[texan]

The problem with your attempt here to make an argument against the meaning of "evolution" is that you miss the point. Yes, evolution describes the processes of speciation, but you conveniently forget that your definition is dependent upon presuppositions about the nature of nature so to speak...it depends upon the universe being uncreated. "Evolution", ALWAYS is described in terms of NATURAL processes. How can one claim it is a NATURAL process, if the SUPERNATURAL was/is involved? The narrative of evolution and secular big bang cosmology go hand in hand. If as you say, evolution does not explain the origin of life, what does? You see, the moment you decide to separate evolution from the physical world from which it sprung without explaining the origin of said physical world, you have arrived at simple speculation, and your definition of 'evolution' becomes meaningless. To say God created the physical world from which evolutionary processes derive, is to say "God CREATED...", and you no longer have Evolution, as Evolution is always described in Natural terms, the Natural excludes the Supernatural by DEFINITION.


Again folks... here's the rub...if you believe that Evolution and creation are compatible, then you have the burden of proof, by describing the specifics of this evolution and it's processes, by showing how the supernatural made the natural, without involving the supernatural. That is irrational. One, to remain rational, must believe EITHER in God's creative acts, OR not believe in God's creative acts. Logic and the laws of reason demand this distinction.

Here is the most simple way I can describe the challenge for those that disagree with my argument...(I.E. those who believe Evolution and God are compatible philosophical ideas)


Describe for me, an evolutionary system and it's process, that DOES NOT presuppose NATURAL processes only, without making it an act of creation.

EX: How did sexual reproduction originate? Or, How did multicellular life and it's interdependent systems originate? (from single celled life) How did the first living cell originate?

Remember, your descriptive terms must presuppose God's existence. I'd say good luck, but I don't believe in luck.

Why do you keep insisting that evolutionary theory demands no supernatural abiogenesis? You're conflating two separate ideas, just because it's common for individuals to see the world this way does not make it necessary.

I know individuals who believe God is responsible for life itself while natural selection is a process which shaped all or part of life's diversity. There is no rational contradiction to that viewpoint.

[colossians323]

Dave....perhaps you have no understanding of the many Sciences and discoveries that prove an old earth and yes, even evolution.

This lack of understanding doesn't mean a magical god of a tribe of remote people created the vast Cosmos by speaking it into existence my friend.

Look back time proves a very old planet; the mapping of the genome proves evolution. Among other things.

This sand found on the beach is made up almost entirely of the exoskeletons of ancient tiny creatures. From long, long ago.

The evidence is there.

Actually, I am not young earth or old earth but your evidence of sand is somewhat unconvincing. There are trillions of spores released into the ocean annually, not sure how you get the evidence of evolution out of creatures that have not changed/???????, especially from long long ago?????. Somewhat confusing that you would consider such a lack of evidence, evidence of evolution

ETA apparently this is something that is unique to OKINAWA? Have not seen this on any other beach

[forgiven]

The believers will be given all the answers after the second coming of Jesus. I for one can't wait.

[brewdickle]

The narrative of evolution and secular big bang cosmology go hand in hand. If as you say, evolution does not explain the origin of life, what does?

They absolutely do not go hand in hand. Any respectable scientist would not conflate the two. They are separate ideas. If you believe otherwise, I'm curious to know where you're getting your info.

Nobody knows what caused the origin of life. Some of us are ok with saying "We don't know, but we're hopeful that science will discover more and more about our humble beginnings." Others may turn to ancient books written based on visions and voices inside the heads of a wandering nomadic tribe.

[Sunday]

Study evolution and you will find only whiskey and wine improve with age.

[Victor Cachat]

Toss out the comparative timelines and you can see it working.
Some people thought of it and made it into novels.
Here is the story on one of them:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waiting_for_the_Galactic_Bus

[Oceanbob]

The believers will be given all the answers after the second coming of Jesus. I for one can't wait.

Do you have any questions for Jesus?

Please share them.