RE: [asa] The Science = Atheism Meme (evolving society, for Gregory)

I believe that God did set up the laws and the initial conditions of the physical universe. It may be, as you say, that evolution is part of that set-up. However, was there an original creation that "fell" and is now governed by the laws that we actually observe? This helps me reconcile such observations with Scripture.

 
Moorad

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of Dehler, Bernie
Sent: Wed 8/6/2008 7:29 PM
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] The Science = Atheism Meme (evolving society, for Gregory)

Here's an example I gave as a comment in the Friday ASA workshop on origins.

I work at a computer company. We design computer chips. We have a software program that can take a design specification as input, and automatically generate layout. The computer generates layout due to an algorithm designed by humans. Was the output design created naturally? Yes, as opposed to supernaturally. Was there a designer behind this? Not behind this specific layout design, but a designer did design the algorithm to handle this layout design and many others. (Side-note: Interestingly, the auto-layout generators use random seeds as part of their design algorithm.)

Evolution is like the automated program. God created the evolution process just as humans created this automated algorithm. Just as evolution can create something without outside influence (human intervention), evolution can also create without God's intervention... and apparently it has, judging by all the junk and copy mistakes in DNA (pseudogenes).

The messed-up DNA is not a result of sin from Adam, but a result of the design process that God used. And God's process of evolution is brilliant-- if anyone thinks otherwise, try thinking of an alternative, other than punting and resorting to fiat.

I think seeing the brilliance in God's design will prevent one from being sidetracked with other trivial nonsense, such as seeing a "Bible code" or arguing about which verse is at the center of the Bible. (Don't get upset by these words- I'm just having some fun, being blunt and opinionated!)

Gregory- I hope I'm clear, in no way does God = evolution, and the words are not interchangeable at all. That was a huge and major mistake trying to replace one with the other in sentences. Evolution is a means/process/system of design. Just like plants growing as a result of photosynthesis and that doesn't disregard God as Maker and Sustainer in any way.

...Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexanian, Moorad [mailto:alexanian@uncw.edu]
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 8:41 AM
To: j burg
Cc: Dehler, Bernie; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] The Science = Atheism Meme (evolving society, for Gregory)

Here is what Arthur Peacocke wrote, "I find the epic of evolution, from the 'Hot Big Bang' to Homo sapiens, an illumination of how the Creator God is and has been creating. Evolution enriches our insights into the nature and purposes of the divine creation -- its fecundity, variety, its ability to manifest an increase in complexity to the point where the physical stuff of the world acquires the (holistic) capacity to be self-conscious, to think (in 'mental' activity), to instantiate values and to relate to its Creator (in 'spiritual' activity). I regard God as creating in, with, and through the natural as unveiled by the sciences; hence I espouse a 'theistic naturalism.'" http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/religion/faith/statement_03.html

Is that not equating evolution as an agency to God?

Moorad

________________________________

From: j burg [mailto:hossradbourne@gmail.com]
Sent: Fri 8/1/2008 10:41 AM
To: Alexanian, Moorad
Cc: Dehler, Bernie; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] The Science = Atheism Meme (evolving society, for Gregory)

On 7/31/08, Alexanian, Moorad <alexanian@uncw.edu> wrote:
> I am going to say something right off the top of my head. I
> will take you post and just make some minor changes and it makes just as
> make sense, if not even more, than what you wrote.
> -------------------
>
> You know, God (evolution) doesn't just create good things. He (It) creates
> even more mutants, retards, etc. than He (it) does something better. So an
> example of something going downward (in behavior, thought, etc.) doesn't
> disprove the actions of God (evolution) in society.
>

I see where you are coming from. The above assumes "evolution" refers
to an agency, rather than a descriptor.

Let me try this one. Substitute "gravity"

> You know, gravity doesn't just create good things. Gravity creates
> even more acccidents, deaths, etc. than it does something better. So an
> example of something going downward doesn't
> disprove the actions of gravity in our everyday life.

Here I am using the word "gravity" as an agent.

So much of the dialog on this list seems to center on word
definitions. I think Bacon was the guy who once wrote that when two
learned people disagree, it is almost always over word definitions!

"Gravity" is, of course, not an agent; it is (apparently) just the
result of living in a universe where mass attracts mass. Which in turn
is the result of living in a curved universe. Which in turn ... .

jb

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Aug 6 22:26:46 2008