divine creation in general and the natural world as a creation of God
It sounds outrageous to attempt a model of the Creator but consider this: there have been models in the past and evolutionists continue to argue against them. Even atheists have a model of the Creator they reject. Creationists are at a disadvantage without a better model of the Creator. It does no good to say […]
Although intelligent design proponents avoid talking about the designer, the critics of intelligent design “know” that they are trying to sneak God into science. After all, who else could the designer be? The critics of creationism reject bringing God into science because God is a wild card that could make any hypothesis true. We seem
Louis Agassiz wrote: …if species do not exist at all, as the supporters of the transmutation theory maintain, how can they vary? And if individuals alone exist, how can differences which may be observed among them prove the variability of species? Darwin responded to Asa Gray: I am surprised that Agassiz did not succeed in
What is a real explanation? We are so used to dumbed-down “explanations” we hardly know what a real explanation is anymore. A real explanation describes all the causes of something. These were divided by Aristotle into four kinds of causes: the material, efficient, formal, and final causes. The early scientific movement of Galileo, Bacon, etc.
It’s rare to find an attempt to understand creationists. But here’s one, in an excerpt from “The Intellectual Civil War within Evangelicalism: An Interview with Molly Worthen” by Tiffany Stanley, December 3, 2013: I think it’s a mistake to understand creationists as “anti-science,” at least if we want to understand how they see themselves. The reality
I agree with those theological critics who say that the age of the earth or universe is not by itself a major issue for theology. It’s only when the age of the earth or universe are wedded to other ideas that major issues arise. Two minor issues can make a major issue. Before the rist
“Design” is one of those terms many people use but few define. Two aspects of design are: (1) to plan and (2) to make. An evolutionist might say that “nature made man” but would never say “nature planned man.” The theistic evolutionist might say “God planned man” but avoids saying “God made man” except in some
It’s easy to forget that “nature” means the essence or form of something. Over the centuries this morphed into nature as a “natural world” as if only some things have a nature, which is mistaken. Every thing or being has a nature, including God. A natural science is the study of things/beings with a common nature
Based on the standard biological taxonomy here is a logarithmic model of the relationship between the time it takes life to reach the diversity that is observed today and possible positions on the lowest rank of the initial taxa of life, which I shall call prototypes. Prototypes of the species rank would take tens of years to arrive
In the late 18th and early 19th century several proposals were made such as Lamarck’s that species were transformed into new species. This culminated in Darwin’s theory that all species were transformed from other species (hence there is common descent). In the 19th century creationists continued to hold to a non-transformist view that all species
