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:
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]
The psychologist Steve Stewart-Williams,[2] in his book Darwin, God and the Meaning of Life (2010), states:
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.[3]
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.[4]
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." 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."[5]
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.
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".[6] [7]
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."[8]
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."[9]
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:
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."[10]
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:
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: