For a theory of god in the generic sense, this is true. However for a specific god with a well constrained, assigned history, contradictions with evolutionary theory come fast and hard.
The tension is only a matter of taste, some prefer to have their constructs built on empirical evidence, deductively derived; others are willing to trade deduction for induction and falsifiability for general explanatory power.
Economists will often use a 'best fit' model in multiple regression and take on faith that there is theory to explain it (an example is freekanomics). Bio-Physicists, too, will take Bayesian logic and apply it to support vector machines and apply the concept to many data. On the other hand, behaviorist psychologists will take a set of preconceptions, make their observations based on those conceptions, and move forward with a functional treatment (this is the only functional way to help people with autism). So too will someone of faith look at his life through the social-psychological construct of faith and make decisions that step outside of his own hedonistic desires and do something truly loving for his fellow man.
Every one of these people falls somewhere on the falsifiability/explanatory-power scale and the functional outcome of the theory can be used to judge the likely validity of the theory. Similarly, there are people who fail to apply the theory properly for their own gain and tell others to do the same (maybe not bio-physics.. yet). But the misapplication of the theory does not disprove the value of the theory, only the limitations of the practitioner.
			
				Last edited: 
				
		
	
										
										
											
	
										
									
								 
				
		 
			 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
	 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		 
 
		
 Facebook
Facebook Twitter
Twitter