Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Rurudyne

is a christian, i have no problem reconciling that god in his omnipotence, omnivoyance, omniscience, created in detail every single building block of matter and energy and set it forth using the big bang as the instrument of the dispersal of that matter and energy into the newly created medium of the ether/universe... i also have no problem in reconciling that evolution in it's infinite complexity is the manifestation of that creation...


3 posted on 08/25/2005 10:15:43 PM PDT by Methadras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Methadras

What Methadras says.

Also check out http://www.reasons.org/


7 posted on 08/25/2005 10:19:30 PM PDT by HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath (Pray for America like its future depended on it, because it does!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Methadras
"is a christian, i have no problem reconciling that god in his omnipotence, omnivoyance, omniscience, created in detail every single building block of matter and energy and set it forth using the big bang as the instrument of the dispersal of that matter and energy into the newly created medium of the ether/universe... i also have no problem in reconciling that evolution in it's infinite complexity is the manifestation of that creation..."

Actually I do have a problem with intelligent design ... its theological implications (if placed in tandem with Christianity) comes close in principal to the watchmaker God of the deist, a big part of why I said it was bad theology.

As I said right out of the gate, intelligent design is not scientific. But neither is naturalism. I imagine the reason why intelligent design is even on the table is that scientist were getting tired of explaining away how tidy the universe is to the needs of life.

Intelligent design would seem to have first reared its head in scientific circles among the likes of cosmologist and cellular biologist within rarefied environments away from the public eye. Since then the idea has moved out into the public where it is finding numerous interested onlookers.

In this way it has a further resemblance to naturalism: many more people are interested in naturalism for its implications or how it supports their issues than are interested in naturalism because they are scientist or philosophers. The interested onlookers are driving the debate here too.
53 posted on 08/26/2005 9:19:08 AM PDT by Rurudyne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson