Re: Origin of life, thermodynamics
Adrian Teo (AdrianTeo@mailhost.net)
Wed, 23 Apr 1997 23:04:10 -0700Pim van Meurs wrote:
>
> Pim van Meurs wrote:
>
> > SJ: Evolutionists must claim evolution operates at this highest level if
> > evolution is to function for them as a substitute for God. But the
>
> > Evolution and god can coexist peacefully, each in its own realm. So your
> > assertion what evolutionists must claim is erroneous and founded in an
> > incorrect definition of evolution rather than in a real problem.
>
> Adrian:
> Seems like you have just redefined God. If there is a realm which this
> entity you call "god" is excluded, then that entity is not God, as
> conceived by the Judeo-Christian tradition. Perhaps I have misunderstood
> you...
>
> Perhaps the requirement or even the idea that the judeo-christian
> tradition requires god to have an active role in his 'creation' is what
> causes the problem here ?
Of course one can redefine anything in order to solve any range of
problems. But if I cannot agree with your definition of basic terms,
then we cannot get a discussion going at all.
> If a god acted through evolution then both can
> exist piecefully in their own realm.
But i thought you were questioning the necessity of having God be
actively involved in creation? Why do you now suggest that He *acted*
through evolution?
God in his/her religious realm and
> evolution in the realm of science.
>
> Science has nothing to say about an untestable hypothesis of a god and god
> or religion needs not have a place/role in science for science to be able
> to function.
-- ******************************Adrian TeoInstitute of Child DevelopmentUniversity of MinnesotaE-mail: AdrianTeo@mailhost.net******************************