Has anyone read a good Thiestic Evolution book?

[fantôme profane]

Originally Posted by Arlanbb

FANTOME ~ From Wikipedia = "The God of the gaps position is that anything that can be explained by human knowledge is not in the domain of God"

That is NOT what I said - please reread what I said in my thread # 18. With my Theistic Evolution human knowledge has NO play on the outcome of anything God has done. If humans have figured out how God did something, that's fine, but many time, like in the past, what we think today is God's truth tomorow the scientist sometimes change their minds with a new theory. arlan

Great! So therefore we don’t need “God” as an explanation for the so called “gaps in evolution”, and the so called “gaps in evolution” are not evidence of “God”. If you subscribe to theistic evolution then “God” is just as involved in the parts we understand completly as in the parts we don’t understand as well.

Originally Posted by Arlanbb

The evidence of evelution is there so maybe the reason there are gaps in it is because God did the changing from one species to another...

But you don’t need “God” to explain the “gaps”. You don’t need to point to the things we don’t fully understand and say “aha, that is where God comes in” because “God” comes in everywhere. You don’t need to become a champion of ignorance struggling against scientific understanding because scientific understanding does not rule out “God” anymore than human ignorance is evidence of “God”. Fantastic!

[Arlanbb]

FANTOME ~ You are twisting what I said. I didn't say we don't need God. I said that MAYBE God was involved in somethings we don't know about yet.
Your "human ignorance" concept sounds like double talk to me. arlan

[fantôme profane]

Originally Posted by Arlanbb

FANTOME ~ You are twisting what I said. I didn't say we don't need God. I said that MAYBE God was involved in somethings we don't know about yet.
Your "human ignorance" concept sounds like double talk to me. arlan

It is really not my intention to try to twist your words. Let me try this, let me ask a question.

When you say “MAYBE God was involved in somethings we don't know about yet” does that imply that “God” was not involved in the things we do know about? Are you implying that “God” is somehow less involved if we understand the process?

This is just a question I am asking, I am not trying to put words into your mouth.

If your answer is no, they why make the distinction in the first place? Why say “MAYBE God was involved in somethings we don't know about yet”? Why not just say “MAYBE God was involved” (in everything). There is no need to point specifically to “somethings we don’t know about”. If you subscribe to idea of theistic evolution, then “God” was involved not just in areas we don’t know about, but also fully involved in areas we do know about.

But if your answer is yes, the involvement of “God” is more likely in areas we don’t fully understand yet, then you are employing the “God of the Gaps” philosophy. If you are limiting “God” to being “Maybe involved in things we don’t know about” then what you have is a very shallow and weak theology (imo). And it is this kind of thinking that motivates some people to fight against science. This is what is so dangerous about “God of the Gaps”, and it is not the same thing as theistic evolution.

[Arlanbb]

The answer to your two questions are NO, NO. Maybe I used the wrong word in the "Maybe" statement. I was thinking about the dinosaurs and just how much god's hand was involved in the way they evolved. Did he have a lot of control in their lives or did he just let things happen and he steped in when things got out of control etc. These are some of the things I don't understand about my concept of my God. arlan

[fantôme profane]

Originally Posted by Arlanbb

The answer to your two questions are NO, NO.

Then we are back to fantastic!

Originally Posted by Arlanbb

These are some of the things I don't understand about my concept of my God. arlan

I just want to say be very wary of the “God of the gaps” concept. It can be very insidious and subtle. Watch for it in your own thinking, and in the thinking of others. And good luck.

[fantôme profane]

Originally Posted by fantôme profane

I have often recommend “Finding Darwin’s God” and I will recommend it again. It is just what you are looking for.

Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution – Kenneth R. Miller

I really can’t recommend this book enough.

Ken Miller has another book out, which I have not yet read. But I have found Ken Miller to be both brilliant and eloquent, so I will recommend it based on that.

Only a Theory – Kenneth R. Miller





But I also feel that I have to say that you could pick up any good book on evolution, and if you understand it, it shouldn’t interfere with your theistic beliefs. Why is it no one ever asks for a book on “theistic gravity”, or “theistic chemistry”, or “theistic nuclear physics”?

I just wanted to add another book to the list. I just finished reading:
Can a Darwinian be a Christian?: The Relationship between Science and Religion by Michael Ruse. Michael Ruse is a philosopher and the book is a little light in the science, but I found no major errors. He makes some really excellent points about potential conflicts between Darwinism and Christianity, but also places where the might actually reinforce each other.

[chronos49]

The best book I have read on theistic evolution is "The Language of God," by Dr. Francis Collins. Collins is a scientist specializing in the human genome. He is a former atheist who was strongly influenced by C.S. Lewis and his book "Mere Christianity." Collins writes in a clear and calm manner, avoiding the emotionalism often engendered by the science / religion debate. You may want to search for the book title at Amazon.com to find many reviews of the book.

[LuisDantas]

Originally Posted by Arlanbb

The evidence of evelution is there so maybe the reason there are gaps in it is because God did the changing from one species to another and if so we have THEISTIC EVELUTION??

Fantome already told you about the "God of the Gaps", but maybe you're being a bit more specific than he thinks.

Those gaps you speak of, would they perchance be the so-called "missing links"? The urban legend concept born out of some sort of expectation that scientists must produce some sort of uninterrupted (for lack of a better word) "lineage" of primates that ends up in Homo Sapiens before acquiring the right to say that man's ancestors were not all human from the very beggining?

If so, then it is a curious expectation, somewhat akin to expecting all falling bodies ever to be examined before concluding that there is no miraculous intervention happening in gravity. There are obvious difficulties in obtaining human ancestor fossils, yet there are quite a few already. What else is needed to fill a gap that is basically wishful thinking?