I understand that that is one possibility, but I don’t think it’s the only one. If you were referring to the strong anthropic principle, I’m unsure why a natural explanation would be required, as you would be making an assertion dependent on a supernatural event. If our knowledge permitted a natural explanation of the situation, that wouldn’t even be reasonable. There’s a lot we don’t know–we can’t reset parameters to varying degrees and see what would happen over eons or develop other types of matter. All this goes back to things we don’t know much about and can’t say much about definitively. Why is anything here at all? That seems pretty lucky for us I’d say. How could a God have the properties that would allow it to create a universe with the properties to support life? Etc, etc.
This is a fairly complex sentence. But I think what you are asking is does BioLogos intend to present its position in places other than this website. I think it is pretty clear that BioLogos reaches out to Home Schoolers… and to Evangelical & Christian Groups of all types.
I see no indication that BioLogos would or should present this information to public school systems.
George
It is not my intention to twist your words. If I have misunderstood what you are saying, please clarify.
It would seem that you are making the same mistake as those who previously claimed that there was no way that scientists could figure out the history of life, or how species are related to one another. When you pin your beliefs on a gap in our knowledge that belief is threatened when that gap is filled by knowledge. In fact, 500 years ago you could have said that there was no way that scientists could figure out how the Earth is so finely tuned for life, with just the right temperature, the presence of liquid water, tides that aren’t too weak or too strong, a strong magnetic field, and so forth. Now scientists do understand how the Earth is so finely tuned. In fact, they understand how random configurations of solar systems can produce planets like Earth. What is stopping scientists from doing the same for our universe?
Where does this come from?
" If you don’t want evolution taught because it does not mention God, then you are saying that you don’t want any science taught."
This does not make sense.
If an argument looks something like “Scientists do not know the mechanism for ‘X’, so it must not occur (or God did it)”, then the argument is extremely vulnerable to future scientific discovery. The argument (and even an entire philosophical position based on the argument) can fall apart quite quickly with new scientific insights.
Who has made such an argument? This has to rank as a puzzling and odd exchange.
That comes from the truth.[quote=“GJDS, post:68, topic:36062”]
This does not make sense.
[/quote]
If you define a belief in God by what one thinks scientists will never discover, what happens to that belief when scientists do make that discovery?
That would be the beginnings of a God of the Gaps argument.
I am at a loss to know what you are trying to do - you are quoting yourself, then pretend I have said something, and then you agree with yourself. Please stop this nonsense.
Those were actually your words:
“There is no way that any science or scientist can deduce what we term “fine tuning” from any scientific theory.”–GJDS
I’m not I’d agree with the teacher giving you an A+ for introducing something supernatural into what is a science based subject.
How would you do this? At what stage did this entity intervene? What approach did it use? No satisfactory answer can be given, and I’d suggest that if your essay was for a science class then it’s almost certain that your entity hypothesis lessened the science.
I don’t think that acceptance of evolution (I dislike use of the word ‘accept’ with regard to something so factually established as evolution, but that’s a word people use) is related to religious belief, though I do think its denial is much more telling.
It was for an Environmental Studies class and I was twelve! He liked the presentation, including the art work and the critical thought - I was comparing two subjects with different conclusions about history, and figuring out what to do about comparing them. I came up with about four different viewpoints and I said the pros and cons for each. I was also developing a sense of how to respect people who come to different conclusions. So it was probably as much social science as it was anything else. But this was “a project on anything we have covered in the year”, so we had quite a bit of freedom. I think the meaning of that grade was partly that he had assumed I would just say “The Bible says…” I didn’t! I was learning to think objectively and to present views that I didn’t hold.
He gave me A++. I thought the second + was a bit over the top!
Yes, these are my exact words - so why do you argue about stuff taught in schools and science is somehow stoped by belief in God? Your comments do not make sense to me, and I am not interested in starting a thread on those matters.
To “1st George” from “Second George”:
So, in other words, if I correctly understand what you are saying to @T_aquaticus, why should we argue about how the BioLogos Mission Statement radically affects the nature of Evolutionary Theory being discussed with Christians?
Are you serious? < rhetorical question.
This is the very point of these discussion boards - - to show that a Christian has a very different kind of Evolutionary theory to work with - - something different from the limited scope of Evolutionary Theory from the limited viewpoint of Science alone! <=The kind of Evolutionary theory taught in schools!
We have Evolutionary Theory harnessed by God Himself to do God’s will.
You will complain that I’m being presumptuous, because we have no idea how God would harness Evolution … and yet we have no idea how God would harness the water cycle to create rain, or how he would harness genetics so that he could convert “dust” and “mud” into the first creatures on Earth, the marine life mentioned in Genesis 1. Or how he would convert the genetics of Adam to the genetics of Eve when he created her from a rib!
“1st George”, you do understand that the Evolutionary Science promoted by BioLogos is exactly the kind of Science that God would expect Christians to adhere to, right?
“Second George”
First off, there is a difference between a belief in God and a belief in creationism. One is not the other.
You are aware that creationist groups have tried to have the theory of evolution removed from public schools, are you not?
I also don’t think it is much of a stretch to say that Christians who are raised on creationism will be much less likely to pursue a career in the sciences. All you need to do is find Christian universities that adhere to creationism and see what type of research they are supporting, if any. I would hazard a guess that Christian universities who accept evolution have a much more vibrant and active research program than Christian universities who do not accept evolution. Creationism is a scientific dead end, and it only encourages students to not look at the evidence.
Their are denominations out there … possibly rhyming with “Crumbly of Todd” … that are quite inclined against careers in the Sciences…
Hi There,
I understand the concerns you have expressed are relevant in the US. I am from another part of the world and I cannot recall experiencing, or knowing, any activities you mention. Thus I cannot provide you with a debate, if that is what you seek.
Cheers.