What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

Incl. intelligent design, belief in divine creation

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#441  Postby Wortfish » Sep 12, 2017 8:10 pm

Shrunk wrote:
I don't follow. If a politician takes a bribe, that's a miracle? :eh:


Not really. But it would be atypical for all politicians to break the law they themselves enacted. Miracles are often defined as wondrous events that seemingly violate known physics. There are some way in which a miracle could occur:

1. Suspension (temporary) of the laws of Nature.
2. Through some unknown, but still natural, process.
3. Through extremely improbable, but still possible, natural events happening together.

I suspect 2) and 3) are the likeliest options available to the ruler of the universe. But 1) is still an option.
User avatar
Wortfish
 
Posts: 524

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#442  Postby Wortfish » Sep 12, 2017 8:13 pm

BlackBart wrote:Conjuring up a universe would violate the first law of law of thermodynamics. Oops.

Good point. Certainly, if ex nihilo means from literally nothing, then this would be a massive violation. But if ex nihilo means the universe was created not from any primordial substance, but from God's own essence, then there would be no violation.
User avatar
Wortfish
 
Posts: 524

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#443  Postby Wortfish » Sep 12, 2017 8:15 pm

Fallible wrote:
How dare you think you know God. You're just an ignorant human and cannot possibly hope to understand His ways.

I know that, if there is a God, he cannot do what is logically incoherent. I know he could not cease to exist if he is immortal.
User avatar
Wortfish
 
Posts: 524

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#444  Postby Wortfish » Sep 12, 2017 8:19 pm

Sendraks wrote:
Ominpotence means you can determine what is intrinsically possible. All you're doing is setting up a framework in which an omnipotent deity has to work, because apparently "it set it up that way, so as to deliberately constraint its powers."

Stop squirming Wortfish. :lol:


That is an interesting point you raise. I think it can be argued that establishing a functioning system does involve constraining one's powers, and freedom of action, as a consequence. The properties and maintenance of the system impose their own criteria that must be followed.
User avatar
Wortfish
 
Posts: 524

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#445  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Sep 12, 2017 8:23 pm

Wortfish wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
I don't follow. If a politician takes a bribe, that's a miracle? :eh:


Not really. But it would be atypical for all politicians to break the law they themselves enacted. Miracles are often defined as wondrous events that seemingly violate known physics. There are some way in which a miracle could occur:

FIFY.
Stop pretending your humpty dumpty definitions carry any weight here.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 27208
Age: 28
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#446  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Sep 12, 2017 8:25 pm

Wortfish wrote:
BlackBart wrote:Conjuring up a universe would violate the first law of law of thermodynamics. Oops.

Good point. Certainly, if ex nihilo means from literally nothing, then this would be a massive violation.

But that's what your claiming with your first creator 'argument'.

Wortfish wrote: But if ex nihilo means the universe was created not from any primordial substance, but from God's own essence, then there would be no violation.

Still haven't established the existence of any god, much less yours.
Still haven't established the existence of anything supernatural.
Still haven't established infinity being impossible.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 27208
Age: 28
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#447  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Sep 12, 2017 8:26 pm

Wortfish wrote:
Fallible wrote:
How dare you think you know God. You're just an ignorant human and cannot possibly hope to understand His ways.

I know that, if there is a God, he cannot do what is logically incoherent. I know he could not cease to exist if he is immortal.

He could if he was omnipotent.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 27208
Age: 28
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#448  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Sep 12, 2017 8:26 pm

Wortfish wrote:
Sendraks wrote:
Ominpotence means you can determine what is intrinsically possible. All you're doing is setting up a framework in which an omnipotent deity has to work, because apparently "it set it up that way, so as to deliberately constraint its powers."

Stop squirming Wortfish. :lol:


That is an interesting point you raise. I think it can be argued that establishing a functioning system does involve constraining one's powers, and freedom of action, as a consequence.

Except that such a god would not need to create such a system nor is there any reason to assume that they would.

Wortfish wrote: The properties and maintenance of the system impose their own criteria that must be followed.

Not if you're omnipotent.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 27208
Age: 28
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#449  Postby Shrunk » Sep 12, 2017 8:59 pm

Wortfish wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
I don't follow. If a politician takes a bribe, that's a miracle? :eh:


Not really. But it would be atypical for all politicians to break the law they themselves enacted. Miracles are often defined as wondrous events that seemingly violate known physics. There are some way in which a miracle could occur:

1. Suspension (temporary) of the laws of Nature.
2. Through some unknown, but still natural, process.
3. Through extremely improbable, but still possible, natural events happening together.

I suspect 2) and 3) are the likeliest options available to the ruler of the universe. But 1) is still an option.


You're still not making yourself at all clear. I don't know how "atypical" it would be for a politician to break a law he, himself, enacted. But so what? Isn't it in the very nature of miracles that they be "atypical"?

#1 is consistent with what I would consider a "miracle", but you say that is the least likely.

Examples of #2 would be common things like thunder, lightning, the motion of the tides, etc, etc, to a person living 5000 years ago. They resulted from natural processes, but which would have been unknown at the time. But are those miracles?

#3 happens every time someone wins the lottery. But is that a miracle? I don't think so.

So, sorry, but you still are not making a bit of sense.
Last edited by Shrunk on Sep 13, 2017 12:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
"A community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment than it is by the occasional occurrence of crime." -Oscar Wilde
User avatar
Shrunk
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 26005
Age: 52
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#450  Postby Sendraks » Sep 12, 2017 9:38 pm

Wortfish wrote:That is an interesting point you raise. I think it can be argued that establishing a functioning system does involve constraining one's powers, and freedom of action, as a consequence.


Well you could argue that but, it would be illogical and stupid. After all, an omnipotent being could, by dint of being omnipotent, create such a system and not be constrained by it in anyway.

Wortfish wrote: The properties and maintenance of the system impose their own criteria that must be followed.

Not by an omnipotent being.

So the deity you're trying to define, clearly isn't omnipotent. Whilst this does resolve a lot of issues (why doesn't this deity divert X disaster/basically does fuck all), it also raises issues about how your definition is different to that of other theists. Which definition are we supposed to work to?

Basically.

Stop squirming.
:lol:
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 13739
Age: 101
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#451  Postby Scot Dutchy » Sep 12, 2017 9:55 pm

He still only talks about Earth. How about the rest of the universes? Still no answer.
Myths in islam Women and islam Musilm opinion polls


"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet.” — Napoleon Bonaparte
User avatar
Scot Dutchy
 
Posts: 38062
Age: 68
Male

Country: Nederland
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#452  Postby Fallible » Sep 13, 2017 5:47 am

Wortfish wrote:
Fallible wrote:
How dare you think you know God. You're just an ignorant human and cannot possibly hope to understand His ways.

I know that, if there is a God, he cannot do what is logically incoherent. I know he could not cease to exist if he is immortal.


You know nothing, Wortfish.
John Grant wrote:They say 'let go, let go, let go, you must learn to let go'.
If I hear that fucking phrase again, this baby's gonna blow
Into a million itsy bitsy tiny pieces, don't you know,
Just like my favourite scene in Scanners .
User avatar
Fallible
RS Donator
 
Name: Alice Pooper
Posts: 44140
Age: 44
Female

Country: Engerland na na
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#453  Postby BlackBart » Sep 13, 2017 8:43 am

He can't do things that are logically incoherent, like exist.
You don't crucify people! Not on Good Friday! - Harold Shand
User avatar
BlackBart
 
Posts: 10506
Age: 55
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#454  Postby Fallible » Sep 13, 2017 12:40 pm

POW! Right in the kisser.
John Grant wrote:They say 'let go, let go, let go, you must learn to let go'.
If I hear that fucking phrase again, this baby's gonna blow
Into a million itsy bitsy tiny pieces, don't you know,
Just like my favourite scene in Scanners .
User avatar
Fallible
RS Donator
 
Name: Alice Pooper
Posts: 44140
Age: 44
Female

Country: Engerland na na
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#455  Postby Wortfish » Sep 14, 2017 1:50 am

BlackBart wrote:He can't do things that are logically incoherent, like exist.

There is no logical incoherence in God's necessary existence.
User avatar
Wortfish
 
Posts: 524

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#456  Postby Wortfish » Sep 14, 2017 1:57 am

Shrunk wrote:
You're still not making yourself at all clear. I don't know how "atypical" it would be for a politician to break a law he, himself, enacted. But so what? Isn't it in the very nature of miracles that they be "atypical"?

#1 is consistent with what I would consider a "miracle", but you say that is the least likely.

Examples of #2 would be common things like thunder, lightning, the motion of the tides, etc, etc, to a person living 5000 years ago. They resulted from natural processes, but which would have been unknown at the time. But are those miracles?

#3 happens every time someone wins the lottery. But is that a miracle? I don't think so.

So, sorry, but you still are not making a bit of sense.


#1 would indeed be what most consider to be a miracle, in terms of something unnatural or supernatural.
#2 refers not to some natural phenomenon for which we don't know too much about, but rather an undiscovered/unknown one.
#3 doesn't refers to several extremely unlikely events happening at once: winning the lottery and learning you have inherited a fortune, and learning that your wife has unexpectedly and suddenly recovered from cancer - all on the same day. That would be grounds to suppose a miracle had taken place.
Last edited by Wortfish on Sep 14, 2017 2:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Wortfish
 
Posts: 524

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#457  Postby Wortfish » Sep 14, 2017 2:15 am

Sendraks wrote:
So the deity you're trying to define, clearly isn't omnipotent. Whilst this does resolve a lot of issues (why doesn't this deity divert X disaster/basically does fuck all), it also raises issues about how your definition is different to that of other theists. Which definition are we supposed to work to?

Basically.

Stop squirming.
:lol:


No. It refers to the fact that establishing a set of rules, interactions and principles means not tampering and changing them all the time - else they would not have any real meaning as rules. The best systems require the least intervention. Newton argued this when he discovered the law of gravity. Rather than have God personally drag the earth around the sun every 365 days, gravity did it for him. But God was still responsible for creating gravity. Omnipotence is perhaps a bad word since it implies being able to do anything at all, even the absurd. But God being good, cannot do evil. Likewise, having created a universe, God cannot destroy it. So omnipotence refers to God being all-powerful, but not in an absolute or arbitrary sense, rather in the sense that everything depends on him for their existence and that there is no greater power than the deity. God may also choose to limit himself to working with, rather than against, natural processes to produce desired effects.
User avatar
Wortfish
 
Posts: 524

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#458  Postby Fallible » Sep 14, 2017 5:34 am

Wortfish wrote:
BlackBart wrote:He can't do things that are logically incoherent, like exist.

There is no logical incoherence in God's necessary existence.


:stir:
John Grant wrote:They say 'let go, let go, let go, you must learn to let go'.
If I hear that fucking phrase again, this baby's gonna blow
Into a million itsy bitsy tiny pieces, don't you know,
Just like my favourite scene in Scanners .
User avatar
Fallible
RS Donator
 
Name: Alice Pooper
Posts: 44140
Age: 44
Female

Country: Engerland na na
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#459  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Sep 14, 2017 6:39 am

Wortfish wrote:
BlackBart wrote:He can't do things that are logically incoherent, like exist.

There is no logical incoherence in God's necessary existence.

You can't argue/define things into existence Wortfish.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 27208
Age: 28
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: What is the difference between ID and "theistic evolution"?

#460  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Sep 14, 2017 6:40 am

Wortfish wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
You're still not making yourself at all clear. I don't know how "atypical" it would be for a politician to break a law he, himself, enacted. But so what? Isn't it in the very nature of miracles that they be "atypical"?

#1 is consistent with what I would consider a "miracle", but you say that is the least likely.

Examples of #2 would be common things like thunder, lightning, the motion of the tides, etc, etc, to a person living 5000 years ago. They resulted from natural processes, but which would have been unknown at the time. But are those miracles?

#3 happens every time someone wins the lottery. But is that a miracle? I don't think so.

So, sorry, but you still are not making a bit of sense.


#1 would indeed be what most consider to be a miracle, in terms of something unnatural or supernatural.
#2 refers not to some natural phenomenon for which we don't know too much about, but rather an undiscovered/unknown one.
#3 doesn't refers to several extremely unlikely events happening at once: winning the lottery and learning you have inherited a fortune, and learning that your wife has unexpectedly and suddenly recovered from cancer - all on the same day. That would be grounds to suppose a miracle had taken place.

Still mindlessly regurgitating the same humpty dumpty definition I see. :roll:
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 27208
Age: 28
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Creationism

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest