Path: g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!darwin.ediacara.org!there.is.no.cabal
From: John Bode <john_b...@my-deja.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Can God driven evolution and science be reconciled?
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 11:02:18 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 45
Sender: n...@darwin.ediacara.org
Approved: robo...@ediacara.org
Message-ID: <6859deab-1bce-4f44-978b-ef76019d710e@w34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
References: <96f41dd6-f6ba-4db1-91e8-f0b7ec927c8d@p2g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: darwin
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: darwin.ediacara.org 1228331377 65412 128.100.83.246 (3 Dec 2008 19:09:37 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@darwin.ediacara.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 19:09:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.189.2.133
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: w34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=12.189.2.133; 
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.2) 

On Dec 3, 11:36=A0am, martycarbone <martycarb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Of course.
>
> If we believe God is an all powerful force, that God could have
> designed evolution.
>
> I do not see any controversy.
>
> Can someone tell me what the argument between evolutionists and
> creationists is about?
>
> Can't both be right?
>
> Marty Carbone

It's certainly possible that God is manipulating the course of
evolution behind the scenes, and acting in a way that's
indistinguishable from wholly natural processes; that view is not
inconsistent with the evidence we have.  It's just that since we can't
tell the difference between a natural process and God acting like a
natural process, we assume the former as it's simpler.

If that's all creationism was about, then you're right, there would be
no controversy.

Unfortunately, there are several different flavors of creationism, and
many of them assume events or processes that are *not* consistent with
the physical evidence we have.  At the most extreme end are Young
Earth Creationists who feel that the text of Genesis is a *literal*
account of the history of life on Earth.  They do not allow for
evolution *at all*, as they hold that all life was created *in its
current form* by God in the span of a few days several thousand years
ago.  They hold that species are immutable, that humanity was created
separately through divine action, and that the idea of accepting the
idea evolution in any form is synonymous with atheism.

These kinds of creationists do not believe evolution should be taught
to impressionable youngsters at all, as they believe evolution
constitutes a wholesale rejection of God and morality.  They see
theistic evolutionism (what you were describing) as being
insufficiently pious, and at least one poster here will equate it to
outright atheism.

That's what the argument is about.