The Cambrian Explosion And Evolution

When I say that, I dot mean it as a mantra. I mean it as a carefully considered statement about what is possible with scientific reasoning.

@jongarvey, part of what is going on here is an attempt to substitute secular language for theological concepts. Such an effort fails, because secular language is not the true name of things. Let me give some examples…

We affirm that God is the Creator of all things. This is not the same as saying He is an Intelligent Designer, as the freight of these words is different than the theological confession.

We affirm that God providentially governs all things. This is not the same as saying He guides evolutionary processes, as the freight of this word, also, is different than the theological confession.

We affirm that God action can be discerned from scientific evidence, and experiential data. This is not the same as saying His action can be detected by science, as the freight of this word is different also than the theological confession.

Detection carries with it the a notion of mechanical, impersonal, math-solution sort of logic, as in the scientific method acts as a detector for god. Discernment, however, involves the discerner, and requires us to have eyes to see, and ears to hear, and includes the grace of God to be possible. I believe, therefore, that we can discern God’s action, but we cannot detect it with science, even if scientific evidence is part of how we can discern Him.

1 Like