Posted on 08/09/2018 11:40:34 AM PDT by Heartlander
Or your definitions for evolution and God are incorrect.
Yes, I am familiar with Alvin Plantinga and respect him… but guided evolution towards a goal would be intelligent design – both intelligence and design would be required.
Today's chameleon is the current state of the chain for its kind, not the beginning of any other animal.
“The premise of theistic evolution is incoherent.”
Nice try at special pleading.
Over a thousand years before Darwin, Augustine of Hippo wrote that God embedded “seeds” in Creation that would emerge at a later time. I think he used the image of an acorn developing into an oak tree, something that he might have borrowed from Aristotle.
Theistic evolution as per Augustine means change resulting from embedded design. Darwin is change resulting from mere chance. Evolution is a suitable word in both uses since the word was in use long before Darwin and simply means change over time and says nothing about the underlying mechanism.
Darwin showed that material causes are a sufficient explanation not only for physical phenomena, as Descartes and Newton had shown, but also for biological phenomena with all their seeming evidence of design and purpose. By coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous.
-Douglas Futuyma's Evolutionary Biology p. 5
Marty Feldman?
The premise of theistic evolution is incoherent.
************************************************************
And a Christian view of evolution is even more absurd. The Bible clearly states that death entered the world because of sin.
You can’t have evolution without death.
Yes, I am familiar with Alvin Plantinga and respect him… but guided evolution towards a goal would be intelligent design
...
Would Alvin Plantinga agree with that?
The absence of transitional species is telling.
That is a question for him...
Thanks for posting the article. Berlinski is an intelligent guy. I’m more of a classic creationist myself although my dad is a devout atheist and a scientist. The following video from Zoologist Dr Marc Surtees explains the problems with the supposed evolution of mammals to whales.
http://edinburghcreationgroup.org/video/32
The fact the species are labeled and grouped proves “evolution” is a step function and not an analog function.
bkmk
Whales were created for Jonah.
Did you know he never left Ninevah? He supposedly hated the people but I guess after their conversion it became a nice place to live. ISIS destroyed his tomb.
Good video of whale and scientist...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTw8MR67xv8
this diagram of evolution of whales is supposed to show whale transitional fossils, but all it does is create 10 new gaps.
****Man has been searching for fossils, or stumbling upon them, for millennia.****
Still think it’s remarkable that for millennia - billions of humans and all other forms of life have lived and died. The earth should be filled with fossils. There must have been many historic, catastrophic land movements which buried the evidence.
You forget the rearrangement of the DNA...rna...different cell types....fugedaboutit. Changes in sperm....biochemistry....not just happy changes....but functional transitions
diagram of evolution of whales is supposed to show whale transitional fossils, but all it does is create 10 new gaps.
And each new “gap” that is filled creates two more gaps.
“Note there are no half-fish/half-salamanders or one-third monkey/two-thirds humans, ever.”
What about those walking carp in Fla?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.