Is Theistic Evolution Intelligently Designed?

CEH ^ | May 29, 2009

[GodGunsGuts]

May 29, 2009 — A battle of websites is rising, and New Scientist is gloating.  Francis Collins, former head of the Human Genome Project (and a candidate to lead the National Institutes of Health) has launched a website promoting theistic evolution called Biologos.org.  The intelligent-design think tank Discovery Institute has offered a counter-site called FaithAndEvolution.org.    

Amanda Gefter wrote for New Scientist, “Christians battle each other over evolution.”  Gefter, who subscribes to Stephen Jay Gould’s “NOMA” strategy (non-overlapping magisteria), believes that science and religion must remain separate spheres.  She thinks the latest website battle betrays religious motivations behind the ID group: “The Discovery Institute has now made it crystal clear that they have no interest in reconciling science and religion – instead, they want their brand of religion to replace science.”  She used an analogy: “Watching the intellectual feud between the Discovery Institute and BioLogos is a bit like watching a race in which both competitors are running full speed in the opposite direction of the finish line.  It’s a notable contest, but I don’t see how either is going to come out the winner,” she said.  But even if this analogy were appropriate, presumably the first to go around the globe could still win the race, but it begs the question whether evolution is even in the race.  A more important question is whether the controversy is just between Christians.    

Evolution News and Views denies that their initiative is about replacing religion and science.  Dr. John West of the Discovery Institute explained the two-fold purpose of Faith and Evolution: “Thus, the first goal of FaithandEvolution.Org is to present the scientific information about evolution and intelligent design that is typically left out of the discussion,” he said.  “A second goal is to tackle tough questions that are usually ignored about the consequences of Darwin’s theory for ethics, society, and religion.”  The problem with Biologos is that it caters to Darwinian natural selection without revealing these consequences.    

The Faith and Evolution website was in fact prompted by the need to answer claims in the mainstream media made by Francis Collins that Christianity and evolution are compatible, not to promote Christianity or any other religion.  In fact, David Klinghoffer, who is Jewish, defended the site on Evolution News.  John West said, “It’s ironic that many of the pro-Darwin groups that claim to be promoting ‘dialogue’ about science and religion are really offering only a monologue.  They do their best to exclude those who disagree with them.  But we have nothing to fear from a free and open exchange of ideas.”  John West goes into more detail in a podcast on ID the Future.

Gefter’s smirking attitude fails to take into account the overtly religious arguments by the new atheists that tie Darwinism to unbelief.  The Darwinists routinely discuss the religious (or anti-religious) implications of evolution.  If she thinks ID folk want to replace science with religion, why is she not complaining about Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens who use evolution to justify atheism?  Why is she not complaining about the NCSE, which has a Faith Network Coordinator and printed a curriculum for adult Sunday School classes?  What about the activists who encourage pastors to preach from Darwin on Evolution Sunday?  Gefter specifically lets Dawkins off the hook.  Consistency is apparently not a virtue for Darwinists.  Their beliefs evolve according to the need to combat any threats to their dominance.

Next headline on:  Evolution • Intelligent Design • Bible and Theology

[GodGunsGuts]

Ping!

[Safrguns]

I dont understand anything about evolution... It just doesn’t make any sense to me... Therefore, it MUST be wrong.

[GodGunsGuts]

CEH's recommended resource of the week:

Has evolutionary crud been corroding your mental pipelines?  You need an oil change.  Think Biblically has the proven ingredients to get your brain humming again.  With chapters by professors at The Master’s College, this book helps you do what the title says: think Biblically about creation, man’s problem of sin, getting into a relationship to God, and all the academic subjects: philosophy, political science, sexual identity and roles, psychology, music, science, education, history, church and state, economics, literature, and art.  The book is available at Amazon and at Crossway books, where you can read the Table of Contents and an excerpt.     One thing you will notice when reading these scholarly articles is how much the doctrine of creation is central to each of them, and how evolutionary thinking has been corrosive to the mind and to society.  Dr. John MacArthur makes that very clear in his Introduction and his chapter, “Comprehending Creation.”  The Apostle Paul said what is still true today ((II Timothy 3:16): Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness.  That applies from the individual to all of society.  The one who has trained his mind to think Biblically obtains a comprehensive world view that can make sense of every subject.  Anchored on the Rock of the word of God, the Christian world view withstands the storms of speculation and the vagaries of vagrant human imagination.

[Mr. Silverback]

Actually, the most ardent creationists and ID theorists (note that they are two different groups) have a problem with current evolutionary theory precisely because they understand it very well, and therefore understand the problems the evidence presents for it.

[GodGunsGuts]

Poor chap, your intuition is in the right place, but you will have to understand why Darwin’s fanciful creation myth is wrong before people will start taking you seriously.

[UCANSEE2]

but you will have to understand why Darwin’s fanciful creation myth is wrong

I thought it was Darwin's fanciful evolution myth.

[UCANSEE2]

I dont understand anything about evolution...

And no wonder.

It seems there is a variety of opinion on just what the word evolution actually represents.

[News Junkie]

before people will start taking you seriously. You speak for "people"? That's a tall order. Speak for yourself to be persuasive.

[Safrguns]

There are only two types of people who buy this evolution myth.
I was attacking the premise of it... and the reason it was invented in the first place.

[UCANSEE2]

We debate the issue of evolution, so sure of ourselves, yet there is not a one of us who knows exactly how even one species is ‘created’.

I know. You would respond, “GOD”. I think that is obvious. What I do not know is exactly ‘how’ God did it.

[Safrguns]

lol... its hard to be absurd when there is so much absurdity around to compete with.

[UCANSEE2]

I’m still trying to figure out what ‘Theistic Evolution’ means.

[yankeedame]

Dear GGG,

Are you familiar with the Wallace Line?

Regards,

[UCANSEE2]

its hard to be absurd when there is so much absurdity around to compete with.

Kind of like the state of our nation. Absurd.

[GodGunsGuts]

Yes, I am. What about it?

[Safrguns]

>>> Kind of like the state of our nation. Absurd.

Yes... and yet also illuminating... revealing... and most importantly evidential.

1Cr 3:18
Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

[Safrguns]

I’m still trying to figure out what ‘Theistic Evolution’ means.

It means you can believe in both God AND Evolution at the same time... now isn't that nifty?

[Matchett-PI]

“I’m still trying to figure out what ‘Theistic Evolution’ means.”

Here’s a web site that is filled with scientists who are TEs, enjoy:

American Scientific Affiliation
http://www.asa3.org/

ASA Email Discussion Group:

This discussion is archived on the web here: http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/

One recent (May 2009) thread is entitled:

BioLogos - Bad Theology? Another is entitled: Darwinism (was: BioLogos - Bad Theology?)

Click here and scroll down to them and lots more: http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200905/subject.html

Pay special attention to these posters in particular: Cameron Wybrow, Ted David, George Murphy, Terry M. Gray

Lots more:

May 2009: http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200905/

April 2009: http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200904/

etc. etc. here: http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/

asa@calvin.edu is a discussion group on matters of interest to ASA members. To subscribe, email majordomo@calvin.edu with the words “subscribe asa” (no quotes) in the body of the message. To unsubscribe, use the words “unsubscribe asa” (no quotes).
Older archives here: http://www.asa3.org/archive/asa/