Intelligent Design Forum/Questions

Do you think all world religions stem from interaction with the supernatural, or do you think some of them might be human constructs?

Well, there it is, then. One’s “not a problem” is another’s problem. Thankfully, you’ve been so open as 3 moderators now speaking to me, to express that multiple voices are welcome here, even those that disagree.

The above to me sounds really like what a lot of atheists & agnostics write about “religion”, except that for them “God” is a non-existent entity. That’s what ERS theorizes & promotes to young people. One might wonder if that sits fine with Francis Collins.

Yet ERS people agree fully with BioLogos that YEC is wrong. ERS & BioLogos have same-side agreement in opposition to YEC or “creation science.” But ERS goes further, so that there is no “human desire to connect with God”, rather only human delusions, which take the name “God”. It would sound similar to substitute “connect with God” in the above sentence with “seek refuge in a Higher Power” or “live in touch with reality”. Sounds “new age” language choice, not traditional or orthodox.

Evolutionary theory in religious studies wipes away the entire field of religion as a pretend game. It’s a “universal acid”, after all, right? For what possible reasons should BioLogos take interest in that? Please, you folks tell me.

Sorry, I don’t understand this term, though it gets thrown around from time to time. It always makes me curious what the individual person means when they say it, since it is such an individualistic (not communal shared) meaning for most people.

What is “the supernatural”, what does it mean to you? That term is not in Scripture is it? It’s instead an add-on that it appears some evangelicals are making, only used since the Superman comics and later films were created, or since Zarthustra spoke of the “supermen” or “overmen” (Übermensch), or…?

Otherwise, it seems a way off-topic question. So, can I please just say: “Go, fish” about “all world religions”? :grin:

What’s your point? That two people can say similar things and still have different worldviews? This is not news to anyone.

The whole “if you agree with atheists on something you have an atheist worldview” trope doesn’t work on me. No matter what discipline or field of study you are in as a Christian, you are going to find ideas worthy of consideration that did not come from Christians or the Bible. I can interact with any idea from my Christian perspective and if I think someone else is making a valid observation about the world, I don’t really care if the maker of the observation and I don’t share the same worldview.

Besides, my faith is not centered on the validity of “religion” in general, or the validity of religion to evolutionary anthropologists. It’s centered on very specific truth claims about Jesus that neither evolution nor anthropology can speak to. Whether moral consciousness and religious practices evolved is irrelevant to the issue of whether or not Jesus’ death and resurrection take away my sin.

So I don’t see what all the fuss is about. If you could prove moral consciousness and religious practice did not evolve but were supernaturally implanted in humanity by God, so what? What exactly does that buy you other than “God exists”? I don’t believe that believing God exists saves you. It actually just creates problems for me if I want to say my religion’s truth claims about God are the true ones and other religion’s are getting it wrong because it puts all religions on the same footing. I can actually get a lot more mileage out of the idea that all other religions are human constructs, but mine is based on revelation of the one true God.

Non-believers certainly do not need evolutionary religious studies to claim Christians are deluded and reject the truth claims of Christianity. They’ve been doing just fine for centuries. All they have to do is reject the idea of God. Or the idea of that the Christian God is the true one.


Anything that refers to beings, places, and events that transcend the natural world and can not be observed or investigated using the empirical tools of science. God, angels, demons, Satan…

It’s not a way-off topic question. If you think there is no validity at all to conceiving of any world religion as a human construct, the product of human cultural evolution, then does that mean you believe all religions must equally be a product of divine action?

For me there are just a few reasons for religion.

  1. Someone heard the truth and pursues it accurately.

  2. Someone heard the truth and distorts it.

  3. Someone comes up with a lie knowingly and teaches it.

  4. Someone is deceived and pursues it.

  5. Someone is delusional and lost in it.

Does this presume that hearing the truth is encountering God? Or can someone pursue the truth based on purely human reasoning and general revelation?

Guess it depends on that particular religious set up.

In my faith, it requires hearing the word of God and knowing truth and righteousness and actively choosing to pursue it.

So to be a Christian a person has to hear the gospel and choose to believe it. They must choose to place their faith in Christ and pursue his righteousness and the doctrine set out by the apostles.

Other religions may have different standards.

I have yet to see evidence that God is involved in anything. However, I am not confident enough to claim that my knowledge is perfect, so I leave open the possibility that God is involved.

For this atheist, the word “supernatural” is equivalent to “believed through faith” and “can’t be evidenced or tested”.

Hi. Would have “liked” your post for the effort, except for this was only this part that I actually liked.

But I don’t like “not confident enough”. Not good in dating/marriage, sports or theology. What would it take for you to become (more) confident?

Think Yoda if you must, as an atheist’s stairway towards something more profound and important than Joseph Campbell + George Lucas’s science fiction: “Do or do not: there is no try.”

Being omniscient would help. How else can you absolutely prove a negative?

I am sure there are people who can bluff their way through arguments based on claims of negative proof, but I would rather take a more humble approach and admit my ignorance. If that means I don’t do as well with the ladies on the church softball team as the braggart who claims to know everything, then so be it.


Looking for God in a proof? Waiting for someone to argue the belief into you, who aspires to omniscience?

It would not surprise if your humility (not before God, but people) is proportional to your lack of confidence.

I only need evidence, and I have yet to see any that convinced me. That’s it.

You could always try to pray for convincing evidence to be shown to you then.

Did that. Didn’t work.

We should always remember that faith is a gift. We should not hammer on non-believers who mean no harm.


This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6

This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.