The opponent of Creationism is Naturalism not Evolution

quote:

---

You will understand what my creationism is after I propose several topics for debate. I’m going to propose a series of topics. The answer for each topic is YES or NO. If YES, I won the debate on that topic; if NO, I lost, and I would state I was wrong.

---

I hope that you are going to provide more substance than you did here. The Jastrow quote has come up before, but without any clear indication of just what the theologians apparently anticipated. I don’t think that cosmology has really hit the final peaks even now - and I don’t see much of a contribution from theology.

quote:

---

It seems that almost all posts of this topic agree that the opponent of Creationism is Naturalism not Evolution...

---

More accurately we’re prepared to accept that what you are calling Creationism is opposed to Naturalism rather than Evolution. In the more usual formulation Creationism is opposed to even Theistic Evolution, despite the latter’s rejection of Naturalism.

quote:

---

The debate I’m going to put forward focuses on Atheism vs. Theism in science, especially in biology, or Naturalism vs. Creationism, where Naturalism represents believing in Naturalism rather than using it as a method, or usually called as philosophical naturalism. In short, this debate will discuss whether the existence of God needs to be considered in the interpretation of the world.

---

That seems to be contradictory. If you say that God needs to be considered in scientific interpretation of the world you are expressly taking a stand against methodological naturalism.