Deistic evolution

Last updated

Deistic evolution is a position in the origins debate which involves accepting the scientific evidence for evolution and age of the universe whilst advocating the view that a Deistic God created the universe but has not interfered since. The position is a counterpoint to theistic evolution and is endorsed by those who believe in Deism, and accept the scientific consensus on evolution. Various views on Deistic evolution:

Contents

In Christian Theology, by Millard J. Erickson, 2013, it is written: “deistic evolution is perhaps the best way to describe one variety of what is generally called theistic evolution.” [1] He describes it as the belief that God “began the process of evolution, producing the first matter and implanting within the creation the laws of its development has followed.” Following the establishment of this process, this Creator then “withdrew from active involvement with the world, becoming, so to speak, Creator Emeritus.” [1]

God is the Creator, the ultimate cause, but evolution is the means, the proximate cause. Thus, except for its view of the very beginning of matter, deistic evolution is identical to naturalistic evolution, for it denies that there is any direct activity by a personal God during the ongoing creative process. Deistic evolution has little difficulty with the scientific data. There is a definite conflict, however, between deism's view of an absentee God and the biblical picture of a God who has been involved in a whole series of creative acts. In particular, both Genesis accounts of the origin of human beings indicate that God definitely and distinctly willed and acted to bring them into existence. In addition, deistic evolution conflicts with the scriptural doctrine of providence, according to which God is personally and intimately concerned with and involved in what is going on in the specific events within his entire creation. [1]

The psychologist Steve Stewart-Williams, [2] in his book Darwin, God and the Meaning of Life (2010), states:

Deistic evolutionists hold that God created the universe and the laws of nature... but that once the ball was rolling, he ceased to intervene in the day-today running of the world or in the course of natural law. God was like the ether after Einstein: he no longer had any role to play in the universe. [3]

Stewart-Williams further writes that deistic evolution strips God of what most religious believers consider central. Any deistic God is not around for prayers, miracles, or to intervene in people's lives, and that because of this, it is unpopular with monotheistic religions. [4]

Deistic Evolution adheres to the concept of some form of God, but denies any personal God. A recent defender of deistic evolution was Michael Anthony Corey, author of the book Back to Darwin: The Scientific Case for Deistic Evolution (1994).

Some scholars have written that Charles Darwin was an advocate of deistic evolution. [5]

Deistic evolution is similarly the operative idea in Pandeism, which has been counted amongst the handful of spiritual beliefs which "are compatible with modern science."[ citation needed ] and specifically wherein it is noted that "pandeistic belief systems .... [present] the inclusion of God as the ever unfolding expression of a complex universe with an identifiable beginning but no teleological direction necessarily present." [6]

Theistic predeterminism

Deistic evolution is not the same as theistic evolution, yet they are sometimes confused. The difference rests on the difference between a theistic God that is interested in, if not actively involved in, the outcome of his creation and humanity specifically and a deistic god that is either disinterested in the outcome, and holds no special place for humanity, or will not intervene. Often, there is no discernible difference between the two positions—the choice of terminology has more to do with the believer and her or his need for a God, than fitting into a mostly arbitrary dictionary or academic definition.

Criticism from Christian Creationists

Deistic evolution has been criticized by Christian creationists as being incompatible with Christianity since it contradicts a literal reading of the Bible, and more importantly, leaves no role for the "Christian personal God". [7] [8]

M. J. Erickson wrote that deistic evolution is in conflict with the scriptural doctrine of providence, according to which "God is personally and intimately concerned with and involved in what is going on in the specific events within his entire creation." [9]

Charles P. Grannan wrote in 1894, "Another baseless assumption of negative critics is that the general principles of Atheistic and Deistic evolution, admitted by many scientists to account for the origin of the various species of plants and animals, should also be applied to explain the origin of the Christian religion." [10]

Charles Wesley Rishell criticized the concept in 1899, comparing it to the notion (false, in his view), that gravity was a property of matter instead of a continued action of God:

If evolution is God's method of creating he is still at work. Theistic Deism and evolution is possible, but deistic evolution is a contradiction in terms. Again, it is all a mere supposition that God created the world and endowed it with forces which will of necessity work out his will. It is impossible for us to say that God put forth energy in the beginning and then ceased. It is, to say the least, as probable that gravitation is a divine force constantly exerted on matter in a certain way as that it is a divine force deposited in matter once for all. [11]

The Roman Catholic Church disagrees with the doctrine of deistic evolution. In November 2005, Pope Benedict addressed a general audience of 25,000 in St. Peter's Square:

When the Pontiff finished his address, he put his papers to one side and commented on the thought of St. Basil the Great, a Doctor of the Church, who said that some, "deceived by the atheism they bear within them, imagined the universe deprived of a guide and order, at the mercy of chance. I believe the words of this fourth-century Father are of amazing timeliness," said Benedict XVI. "How many are these 'some' today? Deceived by atheism, they believe and try to demonstrate that it is scientific to think that everything lacks a guide and order." [12]

Science

Deistic evolution does not oppose or contradict evolution or come into conflict with science as it says that a God started the process and then left it to natural processes. However, deism is still a religious philosophy.

Stewart-Williams wrote regarding deistic evolution and science:

Deistic evolution eliminates any immediate conflict between science and belief in God. Anyone who believes that God's role was merely to create the laws of nature can accept the scientific worldview in its totality; they simply add the proviso that 'God did it' - i.e., that God is responsible for the world that science describes. [13]

There is considerable room for this "god of the gaps" view, since scientific observation is entirely unable to shed any light on what happened during the Planck epoch, the earliest 10−43 seconds in the history of the universe. All development since this initial creative act merely follows laws and principles which He created:


See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Creationism</span> Belief that nature originated through supernatural acts

Creationism is the religious belief that nature, and aspects such as the universe, Earth, life, and humans, originated with supernatural acts of divine creation. In its broadest sense, creationism includes a continuum of religious views, which vary in their acceptance or rejection of scientific explanations such as evolution that describe the origin and development of natural phenomena.

Deism is the philosophical position and rationalistic theology that generally rejects revelation as a source of divine knowledge and asserts that empirical reason and observation of the natural world are exclusively logical, reliable, and sufficient to determine the existence of a Supreme Being as the creator of the universe. More simply stated, Deism is the belief in the existence of God, solely based on rational thought without any reliance on revealed religions or religious authority. Deism emphasizes the concept of natural theology—that is, God's existence is revealed through nature.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theism</span> Belief in the existence of at least one deity

Theism is broadly defined as the belief in the existence of at least one deity. In common parlance, or when contrasted with deism, the term often describes the philosophical conception of God that is found in classical theism—or the conception found in monotheism—or gods found in polytheistic religions—or a belief in God or gods without the rejection of revelation, as is characteristic of deism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theistic evolution</span> Views that religion is compatible with science

Theistic evolution, alternatively called evolutionary creationism, is a view that God acts and creates through laws of nature. Here, God is taken as the primary cause while natural causes are secondary, positing that the concept of God and religious beliefs are compatible with the findings of modern science, including evolution. Theistic evolution is not in itself a scientific theory, but includes a range of views about how science relates to religious beliefs and the extent to which God intervenes. It rejects the strict creationist doctrines of special creation, but can include beliefs such as creation of the human soul. Modern theistic evolution accepts the general scientific consensus on the age of the Earth, the age of the universe, the Big Bang, the origin of the Solar System, the origin of life, and evolution.

The existence of God is a subject of debate in the philosophy of religion. A wide variety of arguments for and against the existence of God can be categorized as logical, empirical, metaphysical, subjective or scientific. In philosophical terms, the question of the existence of God involves the disciplines of epistemology and ontology and the theory of value.

Theistic science, also referred to as theistic realism, is the pseudoscientific proposal that the central scientific method of requiring testability, known as methodological naturalism, should be replaced by a philosophy of science that allows occasional supernatural explanations which are inherently untestable. Proponents propose supernatural explanations for topics raised by their theology, in particular evolution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Evolution and the Catholic Church</span> Attitude of the Catholic Church to evolution theory

The Catholic Church holds no official position on the theory of creation or evolution, leaving the specifics of either theistic evolution or literal creationism to the individual within certain parameters established by the Church. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, any believer may accept either literal or special creation within the period of an actual six-day, twenty-four-hour period, or they may accept the belief that the earth evolved over time under the guidance of God. Catholicism holds that God initiated and continued the process of his creation, that Adam and Eve were real people, and that all humans, whether specially created or evolved, have and have always had specially created souls for each individual.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jewish views on evolution</span> Jewish views on biological evolution

Jewish views on evolution includes a continuum of views about the theory of evolution, experimental evolution, the origin of life, the age of the universe, and theistic evolution. Today, many Jewish people accept the theory of evolution and do not see it as incompatible with traditional Judaism, reflecting the emphasis of prominent rabbis such as the Vilna Gaon and Maimonides on the ethical rather than factual significance of scripture.

A personal god, or personal goddess, is a deity who can be related to as a person, instead of as an impersonal force, such as the Absolute. In the scriptures of the Abrahamic religions, God is described as being a personal creator, speaking in the first person and showing emotion such as anger and pride, and sometimes appearing in anthropomorphic shape. In the Pentateuch, for example, God talks with and instructs his prophets and is conceived as possessing volition, emotions, intention, and other attributes characteristic of a human person. Personal relationships with God may be described in the same ways as human relationships, such as a Father, as in Christianity, or a Friend as in Sufism.

In the history of religion and philosophy, deus otiosus is the belief in a creator God who has entirely withdrawn from governing the universe after creating it or is no longer involved in its daily operation. In Western philosophy the concept of deus otiosus has been associated with Deism since the 17th century, although not a core tenet as often thought.

In social, cultural, and religious studies in the United States, the "epic of evolution" is a narrative that blends religious and scientific views of cosmic, biological, and sociocultural evolution in a mythological manner. According to The Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature, an "epic of evolution" encompasses

the 14 billion year narrative of cosmic, planetary, life, and cultural evolution—told in sacred ways. Not only does it bridge mainstream science and a diversity of religious traditions; if skillfully told, it makes the science story memorable and deeply meaningful, while enriching one's religious faith or secular outlook.

The reaction of Jewish leaders and organizations to intelligent design has been primarily concerned with responding to proposals to include intelligent design in public school curricula as a rival scientific hypothesis to modern evolutionary theory.

<i>Why Darwin Matters</i> 2006 book by Michael Shermer

Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design is a 2006 book by Michael Shermer, an author, publisher, and historian of science. Shermer examines the theory of evolution and the arguments presented against it. He demonstrates that the theory is very robust and is based on a convergence of evidence from a number of different branches of science. The attacks against it are, for the most part, very simplistic and easily demolished. He discusses how evolution and other branches of science can coexist with religious beliefs. He describes how he and Darwin both started out as creationists and how their thinking changed over time. He examines current attitudes towards evolution and science in general. He finds that in many cases the problem people have is not with the facts about evolution but with their ideas of what it implies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Christian deism</span> Philosophy of religion

Christian deism is a standpoint in the philosophy of religion stemming from Christianity and Deism. It refers to Deists who believe in the moral teachings—but not the divinity—of Jesus. Corbett and Corbett (1999) cite John Adams and Thomas Jefferson as exemplars.

Deism, the religious attitude typical of the Enlightenment, especially in France and England, holds that the only way the existence of God can be proven is to combine the application of reason with observation of the world. A Deist is defined as "One who believes in the existence of a God or Supreme Being but denies revealed religion, basing his belief on the light of nature and reason." Deism was often synonymous with so-called natural religion because its principles are drawn from nature and human reasoning. In contrast to Deism there are many cultural religions or revealed religions, such as Judaism, Trinitarian Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and others, which believe in supernatural intervention of God in the world; while Deism denies any supernatural intervention and emphasizes that the world is operated by natural laws of the Supreme Being.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pandeism</span> Belief that God created the universe by becoming it

Pandeism, or pan-deism, is a theological doctrine that combines aspects of pantheism with aspects of deism. Unlike classical deism, which holds that the creator deity does not interfere with the universe after its creation, pandeism holds that such an entity became the universe and ceased to exist as a separate entity. Pandeism purports to explain why God would create a universe and then appear to abandon it, and pandeism seeks to explain the origin and purpose of the universe.

Although biological evolution has been vocally opposed by some religious groups, many other groups accept the scientific position, sometimes with additions to allow for theological considerations. The positions of such groups are described by terms including "theistic evolution", "theistic evolutionism" or "evolutionary creation". Of all the religious groups included on the chart, Buddhists are the most accepting of evolution. Theistic evolutionists believe that there is a God, that God is the creator of the material universe and all life within, and that biological evolution is a natural process within that creation. Evolution, according to this view, is simply a tool that God employed to develop human life. According to the American Scientific Affiliation, a Christian organization of scientists:

A theory of theistic evolution (TE) — also called evolutionary creation — proposes that God's method of creation was to cleverly design a universe in which everything would naturally evolve. Usually the "evolution" in "theistic evolution" means Total Evolution — astronomical evolution and geological evolution plus chemical evolution and biological evolution — but it can refer only to biological evolution.

The belief that God became the Universe is a theological doctrine that has been developed several times historically, and holds that the creator of the universe actually became the universe. Historically, for versions of this theory where God has ceased to exist or to act as a separate and conscious entity, some have used the term pandeism, which combines aspects of pantheism and deism, to refer to such a theology. A similar concept is panentheism, which has the creator become the universe only in part, but remain in some other part transcendent to it, as well. Hindu texts like the Mandukya Upanishad speak of the undivided one which became the universe.

Criticism of pandeism has been carried out in various ways by proponents of other theological models, particularly of atheism and theism. Proponents of pandeism have themselves published collections containing criticism from various viewpoints, including those written from Christian, Jewish, Islamic, New Thought, and Atheist perspectives, as part of efforts to increase awareness and debate regarding Pandeism. At times, ideological foes have accused political and religious figures of secretly being pandeists, as a means of casting aspersions on those accused.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology , 2013, page 398.
  2. "Homepage for Dr Steve Stewart-Williams". Archived from the original on 2015-02-04. Retrieved 2015-07-17.
  3. Steve Stewart-Williams Darwin, God and the Meaning of Life 2010 p. 70
  4. Steve Stewart-Williams, p. 71
  5. Christian C. Young, Mark A. Largent Evolution and Creationism: A Documentary and Reference Guide 2007, p. xiii
  6. Bruner, Michael S.; Davenport, John; Norwine, Jim (2013). "An Evolving Worldview: Culture-Shift in University Students". In Norwine, Jim (ed.). A World After Climate Change and Culture-Shift. Springer. p. 46. ISBN   9400773528. Some of us think that postmodernity represents a similar change of dominant worldviews, one which could turn out to be just as singular as modernity by being a stunning amalgam of James and Weber. If we are correct, then the changed attitudes, assumptions, and values might work together to change ways of life which in turn transform our geographies of mind and being, that is, both the actual physical landscapes and the mental valuescapes we inhabit. One increasingly common outcome of this ongoing transformation, itself a symptom perhaps of post-industrial secular societies, is the movement away from self-denial toward a denial of the supernatural. This development promises to fundamentally alter future geographies of mind and being by shifting the locus of causality from an exalted Godhead to the domain of Nature. How this Nature is ultimately defined has broad repercussions for the, at times, artificial distinction between religious and secular worldviews. For Levine (2011), "secularism is a positive, not a negative, condition, not a denial of the world of spirit and of religion, but an affirmation of the world we're living in now ... such a world is capable of bringing us to the condition of 'fullness' that religion has always promised" (Levine quoted in Wood 2011). For others, this "fullness" is present in more religious-oriented pantheistic or pandeistic belief systems with, in the latter case, the inclusion of God as the ever unfolding expression of a complex universe with an identifiable beginning but no teleological direction necessarily present.
  7. James K. A. Smith, Amos Yong Science and the Spirit: A Pentecostal Engagement With the Sciences p. 93
  8. Liberty: a magazine of religious freedom: Volumes 86-88, p. 85
  9. Erickson M.J., "Christian Theology", 1985, Baker, Grand Rapids, MI, pp. 480-481
  10. "Higher Criticism and the Bible," by Charles P. Grannan, DD, PhD, in The American Catholic Quarterly Review, 1894, Volume 19, Page 577.
  11. The Foundations of the Christian Faith by Charles Wesley Rishell, 1899, Page 157.
  12. "Zenit News Agency - The World Seen From Rome". October 2, 2006. Archived from the original on October 2, 2006.
  13. Williams, p. 70