God of the gaps

We need a "God of the gaps" to explain how the original, defining event happened.

This essentially eliminated the "God of the gaps" that had come about in the 17th century.

The "God of the gaps" viewpoint has also been criticized by theologians and philosophers.

Coulson apparently coined the phrase God of the gaps.

It is claimed that the actual phrase 'God of the gaps' was invented by Coulson.

This internal push and pull between the spiritual and the rational reflects what used to be called the "God of the gaps" view of religion.

The opposite of this is the god of the gaps argument, namely that if science can't explain any given phenomenon, religion can, often by postulating a god.

Other prominent atheists, such as Richard Dawkins, suggested Flew's deism was a form of God of the gaps.

God of the gaps is a type of theological perspective in which gaps in scientific knowledge are taken to be evidence or proof of God's existence.

They need to watch The God of the Gaps by Neil deGrasse Tyson and go basic to school to get a basic education in physics and biology.

The New Atheists excitedly point out that this is the so-called "God of the gaps" - that just because we can't explain something we attribute it to God.

Scottish evangelist, writer, and lecturer Henry Drummond previously developed the concept of a "God of the gaps" in his Lowell Lectures on the Ascent of Man.

However, critics view irreducible complexity as a special case of the "complexity indicates design" claim, and thus see it as an argument from ignorance and God of the gaps argument.

There is no 'God of the gaps' to take over at those strategic places where science fails; and the reason is that gaps of this sort have the unpreventable habit of shrinking.

The term "God of the gaps" is sometimes used in describing the incremental retreat of religious explanations of physical phenomena in the face of increasingly comprehensive scientific explanations for those phenomena.

Letting divine causes fill in wherever naturalistic ones are hard to find is not only bad theology - it leaves you worshiping a "God of the gaps" - but it is also a science-stopper.

Ietsism also shares many attributes with similar viewpoints such as Deism and the so-called 'God of the Gaps', whose origins lie more in questions about the nature and origin of the physical universe.

He states that the responses to questions concerning science and religion boil down to three strategies, God of the gaps, inference to the best explanation, and religion and science explain truths in different domains.

"God of the gaps" argument has been traditionally advanced by scholarly Christians, was intended as a criticism against weak or tenuous faith, not as a statement against theism or belief in God.

"Irreducible complexity and complex specified information are special cases of the "complexity indicates design" claim; they are also arguments from incredulity." "The argument from incredulity creates a god of the gaps."

God always was a God of the gaps, even when rivalries had escalated and messages had been lost and the genocides of the followers of other Hebrew Gods in the pantheon were going on.

Theologians have proposed that science still allows faith in a "God of the gaps," who dwells within those shadowy realms into which science has not fully penetrated, such as the imaginary time before the Big Bang banged.

He argues that moral law, an apparently universal desire to do the right thing, provides evidence of a transcendent being, and he dismisses as cheap a "God of the gaps" approach, which uses faith to explain perplexing scientific questions.

Behe's claim that the creation of an original first cell represents a "gap" in the laws of nature needing divine intervention appears to be the problematic God of the gaps position which is subject to the gaps being filled by scientific discoveries.

This is an example of one of the major problems that religion faces in its dialogue with science - the "God of the gaps" phenomenon, or the tendency to explain gaps in our knowledge using supernatural "theories" about God's existence or actions.