I am completely opposed to Young Earth Creationism, and think I.D. is “a con job” - - but, still, I have virtually no interest in discussing Evolution as “truly random”. The Creationist audiences we talk try to influence are going to expect God to be in charge of most everything.
I would hope that people can find the conversation interesting whether you agree with what is being said or not.
Trust is not built by insisting that Christians accept a Godless context for mutations.
When I first joined Peaceful Science, it was under the premise that we were justified in having a Christian conversation about some one-off miracles, while accepting the weight of Evolutionary science for God-guided evolution.
Now the premise appears to be re-aligned that Christians should learn to understand Evolution without God. If the presuppositions have really changed like this, I think that not only is this a tremendous deviation - - but it is a deviation that significantly harms the original goal of Peaceful Science.
That wasn’t our premise…!
Yes, apparently I misunderstood what you were trying to do. And now I find you walking so closely in the footsteps of BioLogos, I can barely see a distinction between the two groups.
Thats a crazy assertion.
We oriented around honest and rigorous science, that’s our premise. And that’s what makes space for one off miracles and Gods guidance. We don’t have to agree with those things to make space for them.
Maybe time to take a break, then? This is so far from reasonable.
Who called it truly random? I don’t see any indication of that…
So, this topic started as a recommendation of a podcast. Shall we spin the unrelated stuff from George, which is also distorting the entire premise and context of Peaceful Science, into a Side Conversation called “don’t bother to read this pile of nonsense?”
The irony @gbrooks9 is that Sean Carroll argues evolution is NOT random…
Yes, absolutely. I am considering that.
It would seem the BioLogos Mission is actually more compatible with my stance than Peaceful Science. So why should I have to do ninja combat against the A-Team Atheists when the mission statement at Peaceful Science doesn’t provide me ANY backing.
I don’t understand the objection, even if some aspects of evolution are random (or appear to be). Does God not govern the craps* table?
*caveat: I know nothing about craps.
@gbrooks9 we include a large range of views, and even atheists are making space for Christians that think evolution is guided. We don’t require personal belief in this, but we aim for honest and rigorous science.
I just don’t understand why that isn’t enough for you.
Also I note that you seem to have misunderstood entirely Sean’s point. He isn’t arguing evolution is entirely random. Did you even listen to the podcast?
Is his explanation “… because God uses evolution”? If not, then he’s just playing with the term “random”.
You’re a legend in your own mind. When you can discuss the mission of either BL or PS without referring to yourself or your “combat” against “Atheists” you will be one step closer to making valuable contributions to the conversations. This current “conversation” is so full of apparent narcissism by you that it’s a complete joke.
That is what I thought too…
I wonder if @gbrooks9 might like this exchange: Unapologetic Apologists: Why Would GOD Use Evolution?. Had exactly that conversation with an ID supporter.
What is “adequate” for me is a group that ardently supports God’s use of Evolution, rather than another 100 years of arguing Evolution can happen without God.
Let me know when there is any interest for that.
He argues that convergence demonstrates that quite a bit of evolution is deterministic, following a predictable path. @Zachary_Ardern (a Christian) has been taking that idea forward too.
We are a group that makes space for that view, and in that sense supports you, even though not everyone personally holds that view.