On Theistic Evolution, A Generic Criticism And A Proposed Paradox – Part 3

INTRODUCTION In “part 2” of these series of articles we came to two conclusions: first, that “the belief in “proposition g” (I.e. the generational intra-species etiological dependence) and therefore in common ancestry is, at this point, unjustified” and second, that “explanations other than naturalism fail to warrant common descent”. What does all of this mean?…

On Theistic Evolution, A Generic Criticism And A Proposed Paradox – Part 2

INTRODUCTION In this second part of my criticism towards theistic evolution, I shall delve into what I briefly anticipated I would have done in “part 1” of this series. To recapitulate some useful information, this is what I concluded: -first, “God’s active will has to be involved in the evolutionary process, for something which should…

On Theistic Evolution, A Generic Criticism And A Proposed Paradox – Part 1

PREMISE This article does not have the goal to strictly “debunk” theistic evolution or to show it’s inconsistency with Christian belief (judgment from which I shall abstain in this specific article), but simply show several weaknesses in the belief of certain theistic evolutionist. My hope is that theistic evolutionists may reconsider their precedently unquestioned confidence…