Chance v. Design Part 4 (Evolution)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Tuesday, June 09, 2009, 14:45 (5644 days ago) @ xeno6696

&#13;&#10;I doubt if you&apos;ll find many deists who think their god started the universe but didn&apos;t start life. In any case, if he started the universe, are you saying he didn&apos;t start natural law? However, by your law of probability, there may well be the odd deist who separates creation from life, so OK if you insist!&#13;&#10;< - The fact that you say &quot;...find many&quot; means that you are just ignorant enough about deism that you don&apos;t know that the view I discussed is mainstream deism. The fact remains that you have no means to determine if deism is more/less valid than any other theology. - Also note that abiogenesis literally translated means &quot;life from nonlife&quot; and whether you believe in Krisnha, God, or chance, this event clearly happened. The argument here then, if what I read you to be is true, is whether or not it occurred via a natural process. - There are many theological positions that would allow this scientific abiogenesis to happen, Deism, Process theology, and in fact, even judeo-christian theology allows it when it is followed non-literally. - There are forms of both pagan and hermetic beliefs where gods are treated simply as psychological states of human consciousness. - There are forms of theology that completely abandon the mechanics of the universe to science and only ascribe to theology based on consciousness. All of those views obviously allow scientific abiogenesis. - I think you haven&apos;t explored theology deeply enough to be able to say what you did... no offense! - I don&apos;t have a problem with open minds... - But here&apos;s a question for you, similar to what I had just given to Turell. What process do you use to determine what theological claims are valid and invalid? I pointed out to Turell that his dismissal (and your own) of deism requires some ability to measure or access to some objective mechanism that can determine what supernatural claims are true, and which ones are false. Your dismissal of deism has to be based on something that allows you to say it is false. If god began the universe via deism, and let things proceed with no interference whatsoever, then it still wouldn&apos;t be by chance. Life would still be the result of a creator! Just at a more abstract distance. It is this distance, that I feel, that most people cannot fathom, but this is due to human egotism and not to anything else. - This is yet another reason I cannot treat supernatural claims as equal to natural ones... because they are entirely subjective phenomenon. A supernatural being might exist, but the only vehicle man has to determine truth from non truth is the scientific method. I&apos;ve studied theology and science, and science is the only one that gives you a system that verifies truth claims. - I will gladly look at theology again if they devise some similar system. But I won&apos;t hold my breath, either.