Jump to content


Photo

How Can God Use A Cause If Evolution Is A Cause?


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 mike the wiz

mike the wiz

    Veteran member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,606 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Refuting baloney, crushing codswallop, outwitting Khan.
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • England

Posted 23 February 2017 - 01:20 PM

Often I hear theistic evolutionists and atheists argue; "but God could have used evolution."

 

The problem I have with this statement, is that science explains things by natural causes, and those causes aren't really caused.

 

For example, with biological evolution, if we assume abiogenesis, well, biological evolution would then occur based on natural selection and mutations and other factors. You would say "what caused biological evolution?" Really the answer is, "nothing, it is a cause."

 

So then if biological evolution causes a horse and a bat to exist, then that was because pre-existing matter and natural processes existed for it to act upon.

 

The real problem I have is that theistic evolutionism is basically the assertion God used the various types of evolution but science itself if asked if there is another cause needed would say, "no, the scientific answers have been given, the cause of the species is biological evolution, the cause of life is abiogenesis, the cause of the big bang is....well....the various gibberish about nothing exploding" etc...

 

So then if a theistic evolutionist asks of each theory; "Can God have used this process this theory describes?" Isn't the answer this; "No, because those theories are there to explain why certain facts are caused, and the answer to the cause of those facts is the theory we are expounding, so the scientific answer is that evolution, abiogenesis and the big bang ARE the explanations of the facts, and any other extra causes are not parsimonious to science. We have given scientific answers to why life exists, why species exist and why the universe exists."

 

Darwin himself also said that he would totally abandon evolution theory if it in any way required God as part of it's premises.

 

So it seems to me science doesn't have to come out and explicitly state that God is not there, but this silence about God is really a vacuous point people make about science not having an opinion about God, because implicitly those scientific theories are explanations of the things God said He caused in the bible, in place of God.

 

So it seems to me the complaint; "science says nothing about God", is really a little bit like saying; "This racist has never said anything bad about the Chinese, he only is racist towards black people."

 

So what - if he is prejudiced based on skin colour, he doesn't need to say anything, because we know his personality is to be prejudiced.

 

In the same way, science doesn't say anything about God directly, because it doesn't need to, it's theories speak loudly by saying this; "God is not there, because here are the scientific causes for the things God allegedly created, which is how it happened without God.".

 

Conclusion; I believe theistic evolutionists are deluded and atheists can be liars, because they know it is advantageous to propagate the codswallop that secular science, "says nothing about God".

 

:P



#2 what if

what if

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 347 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 61
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • indiana

Posted 23 February 2017 - 03:52 PM

Often I hear theistic evolutionists and atheists argue; "but God could have used evolution."
 
The problem I have with this statement, is that science explains things by natural causes, and those causes aren't really caused.

 
For example, with biological evolution, if we assume abiogenesis, well, biological evolution would then occur based on natural selection and mutations and other factors. You would say "what caused biological evolution?" Really the answer is, "nothing, it is a cause."

i'm beginning to wonder if evolution ever occured at all, especially if we can take koonin at face value.
animal phyla arrived here fully formed with no detectable intermediates to the previous nexus (eukaryotic super groups) and it doesn't appear to conform to the tree pattern.
science has not demonstrated the single source scenario.

the above completely smashes what we have been told about evolution.

#3 mike the wiz

mike the wiz

    Veteran member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,606 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Refuting baloney, crushing codswallop, outwitting Khan.
  • Age: 33
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • England

Posted 23 February 2017 - 03:57 PM

You're right there Bilbo my lad, and I'm with Frodo Koonin on this one!!

 

How can Goku even have the gaul to face us after these two historic posts at EFF? I wouldn't know! The only way to stop is to quit!

 

:farmer: 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users