How can a person be a "theistic evolutionist" or the more favored
"evolutionary creationist"? If some people interpret data that
leads them to believe there is an evolutionary process going on
everywhere (let's not digress to discussing why it's inconsistent,
as in cockroaches, turtles and alligators) then I don't understand
why a "theistic influence" is needed. In other words, at risk of
oversimplifying this issue, if creation itself continues to evolve
(whatever that means), why is God needed for directing the evolu-
tionary process?
I'm most certainly not a Deist ("God set it all into motion and
sat back on His Throne to watch...") but this idea of "theistic
evolution" seems to have a bit of a deist flavor to it.
I guess I'm revealing that I don't believe in evolution of species,
although there's certainly a lot of evidence of change in the natural
world. Are all you specialists trying to say that change *is*
evolution? If so, why didn't you say so in the first place? Why use a
"loaded" term like evolution and creatively (pardon the pun) develop new
terms with evolution in it? Seems like a bit of unnecessary red-flag
waving, or something like that.
I seem to be asking the centuries-old plea: would you define your
terms 'cause this is what I mean by "xxx".
I just want to understand your dialogue a bit better. Thanx.