Theistic Evolution

I've just read the best discussion I've seen so far on Theistic Evolution, at David Heddle's He Lives.

I've never been able to see how theistic evolution could rationally be distinguished from deism, in one form, or some kind of divine interventionism in other forms. If there was divine intervention, then it's Intelligent Design. In fact, leading ID scientist Michael Behe reportedly ascribes to a view like this.

Heddle says the same, only he writes better than I do and he goes into greater depth of analysis. Actually, though, there is one other possible version of theistic evolution that he does not bring up.

Is it possible that God intervened to bring about the directed, purposeful evolution of (at least) humankind, but did so in a way that left no trail? If so, what we would see in nature through scientific investigation would be indistinguishable from purely blind, naturalistic evolution.

For the ID controversy, that's a moot point. ID claims there are marks of intelligent intervention in natural history, and asks for a hearing and for continued research on the question. (By the way, the way ID is being squashed, even in universities, is astonishing. See this at Iowa State University, and even more outrageous, this at the University of Idaho. Meanwhile, every ideology under the sun continues unabated, under the principle of academic freedom.)

There are Biblical problems with this form of theistic evolution, though. Psalm 19, for example, says God reveals himself through his creation. Why would he hide his handiwork in the progress of life? The Bible also shows that God has not hesitated to intervene in very marked ways in human history. It seems strange to think he would have kept himself veiled in natural history.

ID is about the science, not about the Bible. Let's keep that distinction clear. But those who espouse theistic evolution (most famously, Kenneth Miller) generally also say they believe in the Word of God, so it's fair to apply the Bible to their beliefs.

Heddle follows up his first post on theistic evolution by addressing a theological question. It's one I hear often, and again, I'm impressed with how he handles it. The question was,

"If by means of material processes and chance events, God can bring your unique life into existence and know you as God's child, why do you insist your God is incapable of doing the same thing on a grand scale, i.e. evolution, without needing to muck about?" [emphasis in the original]

The pith of his answer (though you really should read the whole thing) is,

"You may have mistaken my belief that God didn't do that with one that states that God couldn't do that."

The distinction between the two is often missed.

Posted: Wed - October 5, 2005 at 02:32 PM |

Thinking Christian by Tom Gilson getCategoryName("<$CategoryUUID$>");

Theistic Evolution

Thinking Christian by Tom Gilson