If God created evolution, doesn't that count as creationism?

So evolution could be characterised - in ultra reductionist terms- as quite simply *choosing the path of less resistance*.

So if God in His Infinite Majestic Glory and Patience created an array where there were avenues or conduits that allowed species to - over 1000s of generations choose the path of less resistance and "evolve" doesn't that count as *design*?

If that's a little obtuse try this, if you reach out and try to change the universe with your own hands is that really any different from seeming not to do anything but really you don't need to because before anyone noticed, you arrayed things with such craftsman ship that all you need to do is let things fall into place. God was doing the ground work before you were even able to pay attention.

Checkmate Atheists

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

ElwoodBlues · M

Is this the part where we pray to the Big Bang and ask the Big Bang to put is in the good afterlife?

Problem is, your approach assumes a deterministic universe. Everything we know about quantum mechanics says there are fundamentally random events (effects without causes) all the time at the quantum level. If you can prove the fallacy of fundamental randomness you might be able to build a deterministic theory. Good luck with that!!

Jm31xxx · 46-50, M

@ElwoodBlues "Everything we know about quantum mechanics says there are fundamentally random"

But we actually know so little about QM or QP in general. We are as of yet unable to deftly merge the Macro with the Micro.

Yet people speak of science as if it's a concrete thing and I guess given our primate perceptual apparatus, it's concrete enough for us to get by but really, how is this any different than faith?

ElwoodBlues · M

@Jm31xxx We don't need to merge the macro with the micro to reveal fundamental randomness. Bell's theorem tells us straight QM can be falsified by a hidden variable theory. We're still waiting for that falsification.

newjaninev2 · 56-60, F

@Jm31xxx

people speak of science as if it's a concrete thing

I don’t know a single scientist who would ever do that!

Science is so powerful because it’s never a ‘concrete thing’.

Jm31xxx · 46-50, M

@newjaninev2 I know scientists don't. My father was actually quite acclaimed in his field and I was indoctrinated with the Scientific Method while still in primary school. But I said people. Not scientists.