ID and Darwinism

  • Thread starter Thread starter edwest2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
buffalo said:
He could see it. That is not the question.
Click to expand...
Really? I though that was the question:
40.png
buffalo:
Did God know what Adam and Eve would look like?
Click to expand...
But anyways…
Random or chance mutations are by themselves not purposeful. What is their goal?
Click to expand...
The only option is what is known as God guided evolution.
Click to expand...
It all depends on one’s definition of “purposeful”.
But that leaves the thorny issue of Eve coming from Adam, preternatural gifts, bodily immortality, infused knowledge, etc…
Click to expand...
True. That’s why I said that I don’t see how Evolution can be compatible with Young-Earth Creationism.
 
Awake said:
Really? I though that was the question:

But anyways…

It all depends on one’s definition of “purposeful”.

True. That’s why I said that I don’t see how Evolution can be compatible with Young-Earth Creationism.
Click to expand...
What I was getting to is did God know what they would look like or if they looked like He planned.

We are created in His image.

Did God know what Adam and Eve would look like?
 
buffalo said:
What I was getting to is did God know what they would look like or if they looked like He planned.

We are created in His image.

Did God know what Adam and Eve would look like?
Click to expand...
If God is outside of time and knows everything that is going to happen, then I would say yes, he did know what they would look like.
 
Awake said:
If God is outside of time and knows everything that is going to happen, then I would say yes, he did know what they would look like.
Click to expand...
Oops - strike the duplicate line.

But did they look like He planned?
 
edwest2 said:
Evolution is anti-God. It assigns all processes to a cold, uncaring universe that had nothing particular in mind, since it has no mind. Since all processes are defined as "natural, " the supernatural is automatically excluded.

My fellow Catholics need to know that a creative reason was behind all this. And sadly, most leading scientists reject God. Some are directly promoting atheism by using scientific information to compel people to believe there is no God, which one describes as an illusion. Another refers to “the alien hiss of religious lunacy” (Sam Harris), and there are others.

This anti-God worldview stands in the way of the Gospel and the salvation message.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
No, I don’t think you get the point. Evolution isn’t anti-God, because all of its processes are natural. Just like I said, it just leaves God out of the equation. Moreover, in scientific terms, God is not commented on, but in theological terms, sure, you can!

So to close, scientifically, was God involved? No comment.
Theologically, was He? Sure, he could. Maybe he could be not. That’s why it’s a debate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top