if scientists accept God in science, is science destroyed?

Not sure what this has to do with creationist scientists. Sounds more like a deistic scientist. Creationist scientists, if we are using our terms as commonly understood would be fideistic rather than deistic.I think therefore that either the title should be changed, or the content. If the title is changed, I don't think there is a great deal to debate.Edited by AdminModulous, : No reason given.

If you want to, you can have this be a semantic argument over the term 'creationist' versus 'deist'. You can have it be about creationist scientists who are scientists that happen to believe the universe was created by a deity who intervened in the case of earth and/or life (creationism but with no specific religion necessarily). You can have it about scientists who believe that the universe was created by a deity that subsequently let the universe run without intervention with life and the earth being drawn out from those original rules (with no specific religion...essentially called deism). You can have the discussion that is inclusive of both of these positions.Either way: it isn't entirely clear from your first post what is to be debated - and it might help if you include your own position and what conclusions you draw from it.Edited by AdminModulous, : No reason given.

Thread copied to the if scientists accept God in science, is science destroyed? thread in the Is It Science? forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.