Comments on: A Short Note on Theistic Evolution and Frontloading http://henrysthreads.com/2007/01/a-short-note-on-theistic-evolution-and-frontloading/ Thoughts on Religion in the World from a passionate, moderate, liberal charismatic Christian Sun, 14 Mar 2010 11:49:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Peter Kirk http://henrysthreads.com/2007/01/a-short-note-on-theistic-evolution-and-frontloading/comment-page-1/#comment-17505 Peter Kirk Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:36:39 +0000 http://www.energionpubs.com/wordpress/?p=510#comment-17505 Interesting. Like you I think, I have a problem with the idea that God interfered in a special way to create life and new life forms. And I would agree in "<i>expect[ing] to observe essentially the same natural processes at all points as a non-theistic evolutionist</i>". But I wouldn't put all of God's design activity up front at the creation. Rather, as I see it, God is continually intervening in the universe, perhaps within apparent quantum probabilities, such that what seems to be random is not in fact totally random, but is deliberately chosen as a step towards God's purposes. This is essentially the same point as I was trying to make in my unfinished series <a href="http://speakertruth.blogspot.com/2006/10/kingdom-thermodynamics-1-introduction.html" rel="nofollow">Kingdom Thermodynamics</a>, where I also looked at the issue from the alternative viewpoint of the universe moving towards predefined final boundary conditions, such that causality does not apply. Interesting. Like you I think, I have a problem with the idea that God interfered in a special way to create life and new life forms. And I would agree in “expect[ing] to observe essentially the same natural processes at all points as a non-theistic evolutionist“. But I wouldn’t put all of God’s design activity up front at the creation. Rather, as I see it, God is continually intervening in the universe, perhaps within apparent quantum probabilities, such that what seems to be random is not in fact totally random, but is deliberately chosen as a step towards God’s purposes. This is essentially the same point as I was trying to make in my unfinished series Kingdom Thermodynamics, where I also looked at the issue from the alternative viewpoint of the universe moving towards predefined final boundary conditions, such that causality does not apply.

]]> By: Kievas Fargo http://henrysthreads.com/2007/01/a-short-note-on-theistic-evolution-and-frontloading/comment-page-1/#comment-17456 Kievas Fargo Thu, 11 Jan 2007 22:33:00 +0000 http://www.energionpubs.com/wordpress/?p=510#comment-17456 I like the analogy of the rock piles. As for the origin of life, I can certainly see it as a natural consequence of the larger design. The problem is, from a scientific viewpoint, we just haven't figured it out yet. As a molecular biologist, I was always attracted to the RNA theory back when it was popular. Today, that theory as well as the Urey-Miller experiment have little scientific grounds on which to stand. I don't really have a problem with God setting in motion the wheels of the universe, and then later intervening at various stages, including the creation of life. I agree that it sounds inelegant and unnecessary for an omnipotent being. Maybe we can think of it as a continuing process of refinement. I like the analogy of the rock piles. As for the origin of life, I can certainly see it as a natural consequence of the larger design. The problem is, from a scientific viewpoint, we just haven’t figured it out yet. As a molecular biologist, I was always attracted to the RNA theory back when it was popular. Today, that theory as well as the Urey-Miller experiment have little scientific grounds on which to stand.

I don’t really have a problem with God setting in motion the wheels of the universe, and then later intervening at various stages, including the creation of life. I agree that it sounds inelegant and unnecessary for an omnipotent being. Maybe we can think of it as a continuing process of refinement.

]]>