Woah @originmike. That is some serious compromise there! You need to do some reading on the dangers of theistic water cyclism or the debate about divine rain vs. atheistic meteorology!
The weather forecast was rain today. I had no reason to doubt the forecast, and sure enough it’s raining today. Am I guilty of a serious compromise 
Regarding these statements that you have made, do you know for a fact that what you are stating is true or is it simply your opinion?
Not really - just guilty of an inconsistency. The “atheistic meteorology” challenge is a good way to showcase that. Earth scientists for years have been using gravity, wind, relative humidity, sunshine, clouds and all manner of things to explain rainfall - all manner of things, that is … except God! The Bible clearly says that God brings (or withholds) rain according to his purposes. Yet we have “naturalistic” meteorologists giving what they imagine are complete explanations for rain without any purpose, guidance, or God-involvement anywhere! The inconsistency (in your case) is that you give meteorology a free pass on this and think it all rather silly - but all we’re doing is applying your own same logic to that as what you insist on applying to geology or evolution. With weather you are fine letting God just be the background behind it all, but with origins you suddenly ignore your own logic and insist that if God is to be acknowledged in any of it, God’s hands must first be shown to be the micro-manager in charge of details.
1 Like
It’s a fact that creationists don’t offer explanations for genetic data. My opinion is that they don’t do so because they can’t.
1 Like
Do you take the Bible seriously, Mike? It states that it is God who “will give the rain for your land in its season” (Deut. 11:14)–not meteorological forces.
I Kings 17:14 states that God “sends rain on the face of the earth”–not meteorological forces.
So when a meteorologist gives an explanation for the origin of rain that does not acknowledge God’s plans and purposes, how is that any different than a biologist who gives an explanation for the origin of species without acknowledging God’s plans and purposes?
Best,
Chris
1 Like
How do you know it’s a fact? Have you made a study of what creationists say or are you so sure of your position that you dont think there is any need to?
I have read the YEC literature extensively, and I have never seen a mathematical explanation for the patterns of DNA sequences across species. Never.
So Steve’s statement is correct. The burden of proof is definitely on you to provide a link to a YEC mathematical model for DNA sequence data.
Yes I do take the bible seriously. As much as I like to discuss the weather - it’s a favourite subject for us Brits - is there any chance we can get back to the original point?
This is in fact exactly the point. The title of the thread indicates that we are discussing what is science, what is faith, and what is the interaction between them.
So I would be very interested in your response to the questions I raised:
Best,
Chris
It’s good that you have done extensive research into what the creationists have to say. Would you like to tell me which creationist organisations you researched?
I’ll be happy to answer your question, Mike. I’ve read the classic literature (books by Duane Gish, Henry Morrison). More recently, I’ve read Answers magazine and scoped out posts on the sites managed by AiG and Institute for Creation Research.
Now would you care to respond to my question?
Thanks,
Chris
I see this weather subject is going to keep coming, just like the rain that’s hitting my window right now. Ok, the weatherman gives us the forecast, usually for the next few days. I dont recall any of them telling me the origin of rain, which is probably because most of us expect it to fall out of the sky. And my observations over the years have confirmed this. Do I believe God is in charge of the weather. of course I do, He is sovereign. So, getting back to the subject of evolution, does evolution operate independently of God (in which case God is not sovereign) or does He guide it to ensure that microbes will eventually become men. What’s your view on this?
I believe God guides everything.
Actually, they do. Every day. When a forecaster states that a cold front is moving in, it will encounter a mass of moist air, and rain will result, it’s an origin story for rain.
Maybe instead you could also provide detailed references from anti-evolution material explaining what we see after understanding the evidence for common ancestry. It apparently doesn’t matter to you that we have read many many things written by anti-evolution writers. I personally have many of their books on my shelves, I have spent hundreds of hours reading their websites and for fun every so often go and do ‘source criticism’ on some webpage. It is remarkable to see how quotes are taken out of context and explanations by scientists in the same papers are often ignored. It is also shocking that results that clearly demonstrate common ancestry are actually ignored or downplayed as if they didn’t exist. Even on the forums it is clear the people who reject evolution aren’t actually aware of the evidence for it, nor can offer explanations for why we see the patterns and differences in genomes that we do. Mechanisms are ignored and videos are made about random mutations and natural selection, while ignoring the fact that random mutations effectively prove common ancestry and such videos ignore all of the other mechanisms by which genomes can change.
2 Likes
I’ve been following creationism for 30 years or more. I’ve interacted with creationists, I’ve read the online genetics articles from major creationist organizations, I’ve read the (few) professional scientific publications of creationists, and I’ve written to creationist organizations asking for explanations.
How about you: How do you know that creationism can explain genetics? Have you made a study of the subject?
I was an evolutionist for over 40 years and I used to view the evidence in just the same way that you do. Now I see it differently. We all see the same facts but we come to different conclusions based on our worldview. I have had people say things to me like “why cant you see it, are you stupid”. In their eyes I must be stupid not to be able to see something that to them is ‘so obvious’. It’s why I find these debates so interesting - each side ‘knows’ that they are right.
So, most biologists stepping out of the realm of scientific inquiry are not speaking for biology or science when they restrict evolution to a random process. Incidentally, try to support, experimentally or mathematically, the notion of “random”, as in truly chaotic to the point of scientific certainty and see where you get.
Don’t let the faithful atheiests set the agenda and the terms, hold them to the realm of science.
I’ve been studying both sides of the argument for a long time. As I mentioned in another post (apologies if I havent responded to all posts - it gets a bit confusing) I was an evolutionist for most of my life. I eventually came to the conclusion that evolution is not possible. This change doesnt happen overnight, it takes time to shake off years of indoctrination. Having rejected a purely materialistic version of evolution (no plan, no goal etc) I then had to consider whether there was another version where God intervenes in the process to ensure that man would eventually come into existence. I am interested know what the thoughts are of people on this blog - is God guiding evolution or not? What do you think?
It depends on how much of a control freak your God is. How much a parent guides the growth, development, and learning of their child seems to vary greatly. I my case, not so much – that is, not as a child, not as a parent, and not the God I believe in. So I think what God was looking for was something quite general like the ability to use language so that God could communicate with us. That means I think it likely that God intervened in a few ways to make sure that happened… like maybe having a hand in the event which exterminated the dinosaurs.