Edited by Dr. Ben Johnson, Doctor of Divinity, Deist
About
the origin of the species and of life itself:
There are multiple theories
concerning the origins of the multitude of species of life on Earth that
currently exist or have existed in the past:
- Creation Science:
One version of this theory teaches that God created all of the species of
life, from bacteria to dinosaurs to oak trees, and humans. This happened
during less than a week, perhaps 6 to 10 thousand years ago. This is one
of many interpretations of the creation stories in the book of Genesis in
the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). Creation Science is incompatible
with the beliefs of Deism. They accept the conclusions of science that all
life did not appear on earth suddenly, recently, and in more or less its
present form and diversity. They believe that the fossil record and
radiometric dating show that evolution happened over an interval of about
3.5 billion years. "In Deism, Intelligent Design has absolutely
nothing to do with the ... Biblical myth of creation."
- Naturalistic evolution: This theory suggests that the evolution of the species
from the first one-celled form of life to present day humans took place
over about 3.5 billion years as a result of purely natural processes,
including natural selection. God was not involved in these processes. This
is compatible with the beliefs of most Deists because it allows for a God
who set up the world and the rest of the universe, started it up and then
left.
- Theistic evolution:
This theory accepts most of the theory of evolution but suggests that God
used evolution as a tool to guide the process towards the eventual
development of humans. This is also incompatible with the beliefs of most
Deists who believe that God set up a set of natural laws when he initially
created the universe about 15 billion years ago. Then God left, and hasn't
been actively involved in events on Earth since that time. However, some
Deists do believe that God has interfered with species evolution. For
them, theistic evolution is a viable theory.
- Intelligent design: This
theory suggests that there are processes, organs, and designs in nature
that could only have been created by an advanced intelligence -- either a
deity or deities or some life form that has advanced far beyond what
humans are capable of. This designer intervened at multiple times in the
history of the Earth. This is also in conflict with the beliefs of most
Deists because, like theistic evolution, it is incompatible with belief in
an creator God who is now absent.
Not included in the theory of
evolution is the study of abiogenesis: the origin of life itself. Evolution
only covers the origins of species that developed from the original
single-celled life form. There is believed to be no consensus at this time
among Deists as to whether the development of the first life from from
inanimate matter was an act of creation by God or a natural process without
divine intervention.
An article about theistic evolution
in Wikipedia states:
"Some deists believe that a
Divine Creator initiated a universe in which evolution occurred, by designing
the system and the natural laws, although many deists believe that God also
created life itself, before allowing it to be subject to evolution. They find
it to be undignified and unwieldy for a deity to make constant adjustments rather
than letting evolution elegantly adapt organisms to changing environments.
Are
Richard Dawkins' beliefs evolving toward Deism?
In his book "The God
Delusion" Richard Dawkins stated that "Creative intelligence's,
being evolved, necessarily arrive later in the universe and therefore cannot be
responsible for designing it." That is, he does not
believe in a creator God. Some commentators have cited this and other passages
in Dawkins' writings to assert that he is a strong Atheist: a person who absolutely denies the
existence of God.
During In 2005 an Internet site
"Edge: The World Question Centre" asked some leading
scientists: "What do you believe is true even though you cannot prove
it?" Richard Dawkins responded:
"I
believe that all life, all intelligence, all creativity and all 'design'
anywhere in the universe, is the direct or indirect product of Darwinian
natural selection. It follows that design comes late in the universe, after a
period of Darwinian evolution. Design cannot precede evolution and therefore
cannot underlie the universe."
Since he admits that he cannot prove
that no creator God existed, it would seem that he might be better referred to
as an Agnostic:
a person who believes that the existence of God can neither be proven nor disproved.
Melanie Phillips wrote a column for
The Spectator -- a UK magazine -- suggesting that Dawkins' beliefs are
"still evolving" towards Deism. She quotes a
debate between Dawkins and John Lennox at Oxford University in which Dawkins
said: "A serious case could be made for a deistic God." Phillips
speculates that Dawkins still regards belief in the God of the Bible is
equivalent to "... believing in fairies at the bottom of the garden."
However, an entirely different creator deity just might have existed: one that
created and kick-started the universe, but has not been involved with humanity
or the rest of the universe since. Unfortunately, this topic was not further
pursued during the debate
In Dawkins's 2006 program "The
Root of All Evil?," he says:
Science can't disprove the existence
of God. But that does not mean that God exists. There are a million things we
can't disprove. The philosopher, Bertrand Russell, had an analogy. Imagine
there's a china teapot in orbit around the sun. You cannot disprove the existence
of the teapot, because it's too small to be spotted by our telescopes. Nobody
but a lunatic would say, 'Well, I'm prepared to believe in the teapot because I
can't disprove it.'
Maybe we have to be technically and
strictly agnostic, but in practice we are all teapot atheists.
This last statement, we suspect,
reflects Dawkins' true beliefs: that one cannot rigorously disprove or prove
the existence of Deism's absent creator God, the Jewish Yahweh, the Christian
Trinity or Islam's Allah or Russell's teapot, or the Invisible Pink Unicorn, or the Flying Spaghetti
Monster. Thus one must remain Agnostic
unless and until some proof is found. But that does not preclude an individual
from having an opinion on the likelihood of any of these seven entities. If
forced to make a decision based on the existence of one of these entities,
Dawkins would probably assume that none exist. We suspect that he is a
technical Agnostic but practical Atheist.
0 comments:
Post a Comment