Some people say the same thing about a globe Earth and the Bible. They even made t-shirts:
Cheap, ineffective diversion. How about taking a stab at the issue at hand. I have put it right above in quotes. What do you think of theistic evolutionists?
@T_aquaticus seems to like Christians that affirm evolutionary science just fine.
2 Likes
How would this purpose be incorporated into evolution? Are you in favor of the cosmic pool shot or the occasional direct intervention?
Iāll agree we can see evolution (for sufficiently scientific values of āseeā) but how do we see Godās design? How can we distinguish it from non-design?
2 Likes
I lean toward the cosmic pool shot, personally, but I wouldnāt be shocked if a critical nucleotide substitution took place here or there. I fully understand how this evidence-less conjecture can drive a scientist bonkers, but I find it reasonable to accept the possibility of a reality beyond the physical realm.
This is a very reasonable question from a scientific standpoint. I cannot offer physical proof of God and His design, but I believe that looking at the whole of nature (including the existence of the universe itself) is suggestive of a Creator behind it all.
3 Likes
I donāt believe a cosmic pool shot is physically possible, given quantum randomness, but on the rest we can just agree that there can be no evidence for or against. Iāll go with Occamās razor, you go with faith.
1 Like
Fair enough, but would a Creator that brought everything from the smallest subatomic particle into being really be flummoxed by quantum randomness?
2 Likes
Not flummoxed, but unable to get what he wants. The pool shot is the setting of initial conditions. But quantum events canāt be predicted from initial conditions. Even if he knows what events will happen, through his omniscience, he canāt set up conditions so as to produce the results he wants, only a very broad spectrum of results, all of which could follow from the same initial state. Thus if he wants a result, he will have to intervene at various points.
1 Like
Do you have any experience with Godās special providence in your life?
You neglect (not really, but donāt account for) the fact that he is either atemporal or omnitemporal. (I tend toward thinking the latter.) In any case, itās a mystery that we cannot wrap our minds around. (Funny that we canāt comprehend his infinitudes. 
We can apprehend some of them, a little.) And I love it, how he intervenes in my life, pool shot or otherwise, but it is dynamic and predetermined at the sameā¦ time. Our tensed language and minds cannot fathom his timelessness, or timefulness.
1 Like
@jongarvey introduced me to a term I was unfamiliar with with respect to Godās providence, namely his divine concurrence. Meant primarily in the sense of Godās will concurring to processes or events happening, if Iām understanding correctly, it also works in the sense of the concurrent timing of events, correlating to my terms co-instants or co-instance(s), aka special providence. I also find the term hypernatural miracle to be useful, as has been mentioned before.
I have no problem with that possibility, either.
1 Like
Interesting
Notice the tensed language, limited to progressive sequential time ā āhe will have toā¦ā, future perfect tense.
Thatās not a criticism, just a fact ā itās the only language we have to use.
ā¦at various points in time.
1 Like
1 Like
Yes, I also enjoy adjective noun.
You have an interesting usage of āfactā there.
1 Like
Howās this?:
āYou neglect (not really, but donāt account for) that he is either atemporal or omnitemporal.ā
Sorry, but deleting the word doesnāt take out the assertion.
It looks like other people are answering for you. Apparently you are fine with that. However, if I have you IDāed correctly, you are an atheist or agnostic and I believe evolutionists of your variety have real trouble with theistic evolution. But I can only guess because apparently you wish to remain silent. Should we read something into your silence? Who knows.