The shoe that fits the theistic evolutionist - part 2.

[rwatts]

Dear Jorge,

You wrote:-

"A recent letter written to the editor in USA TODAY. It rather well summarizes how Evolutionists regard the “moderate Christian” who believe that God and Evolution are compatible."

Well I am a hardcore evolutionist,* and I think that moderate Christians, and conservative Christians who accept the theory of evolution are perfectly sensible. I disagree with their theology, but I think their acceptance of evolution is eminently sensible. I know many others like me.

So you got something wrong.

I also think that creationists who, despite what the KJV says, reject the idea that rainfall is a supernatural phenomenon in direct cause, but rather accept that it is a natural phenomenon in direct cause, are also being sensible. I also think that creationists who reject the idea of a flat circular earth, despite strong hints of it in the Bible, are also being very sensible. And so it is with geocentrism as well.

"“God did it” can explain anything, and hence explains nothing. Supernatural explanations don’t improve science, They impede it."

I agree. But folk are still allowed to see scientific theories in terms of God, just like you do. They are allowed to see them in terms of no God, just like I do.

As long as we don't bring our theologies into science, like you try to do, then ....



Regards, Roland



* I watch it every night.

[Jorge]

Dear Jorge,

You wrote:-

"A recent letter written to the editor in USA TODAY. It rather well summarizes how Evolutionists regard the “moderate Christian” who believe that God and Evolution are compatible."

Well I am a hardcore evolutionist,* and I think that moderate Christians, and conservative Christians who accept the theory of evolution are perfectly sensible. I disagree with their theology, but I think their acceptance of evolution is eminently sensible. I know many others like me.

So you got something wrong.

You're projecting. I didn't get anything wrong - you did by presenting an incomplete, distorted version of my position.

As I have stated many times here (and therefore I find it hard to believe that you and others here don't know my true position), I also accept evolution -- it's Evolution that I don't accept. It is an observable, testable, measurable FACT that allele frequencies in populations change over time - that is evolution. It is NOT a "fact" - it is a metaphysical belief - that Evolution is how everything got here. You are either confused or ignorant of the truth.

I also think that creationists who, despite what the KJV says, reject the idea that rainfall is a supernatural phenomenon in direct cause, but rather accept that it is a natural phenomenon in direct cause, are also being sensible. I also think that creationists who reject the idea of a flat circular earth, despite strong hints of it in the Bible, are also being very sensible. And so it is with geocentrism as well.

"“God did it” can explain anything, and hence explains nothing. Supernatural explanations don’t improve science, They impede it."

I agree. But folk are still allowed to see scientific theories in terms of God, just like you do. They are allowed to see them in terms of no God, just like I do.

As long as we don't bring our theologies into science, like you try to do, then ....



Regards, Roland



* I watch it every night.

Ah, I see, you're back with your "rainfall is not a supernatural phenomenon" schtick.

That 'click' sound you heard is not me hanging up so go ahead and continue talking.

Jorge

[rwatts]

I also accept evolution .... It is an observable, testable, measurable FACT that allele frequencies in populations change over time - that is evolution.

Really Jorge.

So can you give me an example of what you actually watched?

PS And you did get it wrong. I don't see theistic evolutionists as scientific enemies. I don't see them as enemies at all. As for creationists? Well, utterly bonkers as far as science and theology goes, but in the end, no more or less intelligent or nice or unintelligent or hateful than I am. Some are terrible people though. They tell me that I am "the spawn of Satan". Even if I were to call a creationist a "moron", it could never be as filthy as "spawn of Satan". Some of you fundies really need your mouths washed out with soap and holy water. Others are just plain, decent folk, even if their ideas annoy me terribly.

Ah, I see, you're back with your "rainfall is not a supernatural phenomenon" schtick.

Well I want you to take the Bible as literally as you insist that others should take it. Likewise, I expect you to take the warnings about bearing false witness as seriously as you expect others to take the Bible. Thus, I think you owe Roy some money, don't you?