I'm a Theistic Naturalist

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

IWantGod

Guest
I’m a Theistic Naturalist.

I believe that God created natural processes with the intention that physical reality should naturally evolve without interference from an outside cause.

The reason i have come to this conclusion is because it makes no sense that God would create physical processes if physical processes were not the tool by which he intended to create things. It makes better sense of our experiences to think that the world has naturally evolved.

This means that i reject intelligent design and accept the blind watch maker concept.
 
IWantGod said:
I’m a Theistic Naturalist.

I believe that God created natural processes with the intention that physical reality should naturally evolve without interference from an outside cause…
Click to expand...
So you don’t believe in miracles?

And why isn’t it possible that the process of evolution was intelligently designed?

Do you really believe as a Catholic that God did not create the universe in such a way that Man would finally emerge through evolution?

If you don’t believe that, do you think God was surprised by the appearance of Adam and Eve?
 
IWantGod said:
I’m a Theistic Naturalist.

I believe that God created natural processes with the intention that physical reality should naturally evolve without interference from an outside cause.

The reason i have come to this conclusion is because it makes no sense that God would create physical processes if physical processes were not the tool by which he intended to create things. It makes better sense of our experiences to think that the world has naturally evolved.

This means that i reject intelligent design and accept the blind watch maker concept.
Click to expand...
Would that mean that you don’t believe Jesus is God? Jesus was born of supernatural means.
 
Interesting.
I thought you were Catholic.
It says so over there>>>>>>>>>>>

:confused:
 
IWantGod said:
I’m a Theistic Naturalist.

I believe that God created natural processes with the intention that physical reality should naturally evolve without interference from an outside cause.

The reason i have come to this conclusion is because it makes no sense that God would create physical processes if physical processes were not the tool by which he intended to create things. It makes better sense of our experiences to think that the world has naturally evolved.

This means that i reject intelligent design and accept the blind watch maker concept.
Click to expand...
If that floats your boat, make sure that it is Noah’s Ark. However, what is it which continues to hold molecules bound? Why do the laws of physics, part of creation, not also evolve naturally? Entropy is observable and measurable in the physical realm, yet the laws of physics remain unchanged. That leans toward on-going involvement by the Creator.
 
IWantGod said:
I’m a Theistic Naturalist.

I believe that God created natural processes with the intention that physical reality should naturally evolve without interference from an outside cause.

The reason i have come to this conclusion is because it makes no sense that God would create physical processes if physical processes were not the tool by which he intended to create things. It makes better sense of our experiences to think that the world has naturally evolved.

This means that i reject intelligent design and accept the blind watch maker concept.
Click to expand...
So, you think that it would be more intelligent if God designed the world in such a way that it evolved following its created nature.

Well…
 
IWantGod said:
I’m a Theistic Naturalist.

I believe that God created natural processes with the intention that physical reality should naturally evolve without interference from an outside cause.

The reason i have come to this conclusion is because it makes no sense that God would create physical processes if physical processes were not the tool by which he intended to create things. It makes better sense of our experiences to think that the world has naturally evolved.

This means that i reject intelligent design and accept the blind watch maker concept.
Click to expand...
May I ask, have you read the Gospels before, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, just from start to finish? I would recommend just reading the Gospels and then see if you still feel the same way afterwards, they are not long (Or just a couples pages every night until reaching the end of the Gospels).

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
IWantGod said:
I’m a Theistic Naturalist.

I believe that God created natural processes with the intention that physical reality should naturally evolve without interference from an outside cause.

The reason i have come to this conclusion is because it makes no sense that God would create physical processes if physical processes were not the tool by which he intended to create things. It makes better sense of our experiences to think that the world has naturally evolved.

This means that i reject intelligent design and accept the blind watch maker concept.
Click to expand...
If you’re limiting this to just “creation”/evolution areas, I think your position isn’t all that uncommon, but I think it’s a stretch to label it as a kind of “naturalism.”
 
Charlemagne_III said:
So you don’t believe in miracles?

And why isn’t it possible that the process of evolution was intelligently designed?

Do you really believe as a Catholic that God did not create the universe in such a way that Man would finally emerge through evolution?

If you don’t believe that, do you think God was surprised by the appearance of Adam and Eve?
Click to expand...
I believe God Created the laws of nature, so it would not be a surprise that certain natures would arise given the right circumstances. However i believe they emerge in conjunction with natural physical processes.

While i do believe in miracles i don’t believe that biological evolution at any time involved a miraculous cause. It happened naturally. I believe in abiogenesis.
 
po18guy said:
If that floats your boat, make sure that it is Noah’s Ark. However, what is it which continues to hold molecules bound? Why do the laws of physics, part of creation, not also evolve naturally? Entropy is observable and measurable in the physical realm, yet the laws of physics remain unchanged. That leans toward on-going involvement by the Creator.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe in Noah’s ark. Its just a story in my opinion.

God keeps physical reality in existence, but he allows it to naturally evolve.
 
JuanFlorencio said:
So, you think that it would be more intelligent if God designed the world in such a way that it evolved following its created nature.

Well…
Click to expand...
God created the laws of physics, but he did not design the universe. The universe evolved naturally.
 
KnowtheSilence said:
If you’re limiting this to just “creation”/evolution areas, I think your position isn’t all that uncommon, but I think it’s a stretch to label it as a kind of “naturalism.”
Click to expand...
I call it theistic naturalism in comparison to intelligent design.
 
IWantGod said:
I call it theistic naturalism in comparison to intelligent design.
Click to expand...
Theistic evolution may be a better term then. Calling it naturalism will continue to lead people to think that you are rejecting miracles or the supernatural (maybe something along the lines of Spinoza’s thinking).
 
KnowtheSilence said:
Theistic evolution may be a better term then. Calling it naturalism will continue to lead people to think that you are rejecting miracles or the supernatural (maybe something along the lines of Spinoza’s thinking).
Click to expand...
Spinoza was a pantheistic philosopher.
 
God sustains these physical processes and the existence of all creation. He doesn’t “leave them be.” God is neither blind to His creation nor has he abandoned it to its own devices. He knows the consequences of the physical laws he established. The idea that he reaches in and supernaturally moves the planets is perhaps silly, and I can understand your objection to that, but I object to you going further and comparing him to a blind watchmaker.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top