Evolution. . . yes or no?
Over the last fifty or so years scientists have sketched out a plausable chain of events between a 'Big Bang' and the life and civilisation on Earth.
There are still some missing links in that chain. The proto-chemistry that somehow overcame the Amino acid-Protien, chicken and egg problem (you need one to make the other, and both to make replicating molecules like RNA and DNA) and then there's protein folding, and on the macro scale the apparent reverse entropy of evolution, well, there's still alot to sort out before we can follow the chain back to the Bang.
I want to ask my thoughtful friends around the world how they feel about evolution and it's decendants: evolutionary psychology and even evolutionary sociology. Is it reasonable for me to call myself an evolutionary creationist? Am I retreating like a coward or is it the only reasonable position left in a world with unreasoning zealots on both sides of the debate.
I think the evidence for evolution taking place is hard to deny now. I don't think it can account for a great deal however and am starting to explore the idea of 'steered evolution' a process that isn't mindless, but was started and steered, by God, with Humanity as the target.
Then there's a chain of reasoning that would then force me to take the Garden of Eden story as at least partly figurative. And the 6 days of Genesis is periods etc.
Where do you all stand on this key issue? soooo many 'chains' of reasoning!
Just got back from playing football, am muddy sunburned and bruised, but happy.
God bless you.
There are still some missing links in that chain. The proto-chemistry that somehow overcame the Amino acid-Protien, chicken and egg problem (you need one to make the other, and both to make replicating molecules like RNA and DNA) and then there's protein folding, and on the macro scale the apparent reverse entropy of evolution, well, there's still alot to sort out before we can follow the chain back to the Bang.
I want to ask my thoughtful friends around the world how they feel about evolution and it's decendants: evolutionary psychology and even evolutionary sociology. Is it reasonable for me to call myself an evolutionary creationist? Am I retreating like a coward or is it the only reasonable position left in a world with unreasoning zealots on both sides of the debate.
I think the evidence for evolution taking place is hard to deny now. I don't think it can account for a great deal however and am starting to explore the idea of 'steered evolution' a process that isn't mindless, but was started and steered, by God, with Humanity as the target.
Then there's a chain of reasoning that would then force me to take the Garden of Eden story as at least partly figurative. And the 6 days of Genesis is periods etc.
Where do you all stand on this key issue? soooo many 'chains' of reasoning!
Just got back from playing football, am muddy sunburned and bruised, but happy.
God bless you.
posted by Mr.Thomas at 19:06
8 Comments:
May I ask where these deep meaningful questions came from?
hey yan...didn't you know? I am a '*deep*'*meaningful*' guy!! Care to get "*deep*" too? What you think? Where did you come from?
Well.....if you really need to know. I started off as a twinkle in my daddy's eye which then somehow travelled to my mummy's tummy and then one day the stork dropped me off at our house in Hong Kong.
You know people write whole books on this topic spending thousands of hours in research, trawling through philosophical and scientific facts. And we have to do with a blog posting! ;)
Honestly you can find nearly anything to support your view these days. So you can nearly choose what conclusion you want the look up then evidence to support this view and point to it exclaiming, "Here, I am right!"
The problem with saying that Genesis is partly figurative is then you have to ask, "where does figurative start and where does it stop?" If it took thousands of years (or a long time), couldn't have God had simply inspired the author to say that. Surely Moses would have found it difficult to believe such a fact, he himself lived up to one hundred twenty years in age, so it wouldn't have been beyond God to say, "it took me about 5 x your lifetime to make Earth and all the stuff in it."
I presume he said 6 days + 1 rest day for a reason. And that could be because it was true.
I am also interested in the football that you played! Details in your next posting? Or private e-mail??
thanks..sa: ' You know, on the face of it thats what we look like you know, just complicated animals and that is the prevailing opinion of our age. We should raise out eyebrows in disbelief when others take it for granted. We need to know how to challenge them.
Dez: Well, There's nothing ambiguous about the scientific evidence, there are no rspected reports supporting a 5'000 year old earth made in 6, 24 hour periods. Taking the genesis story as literal is an act of faith, in the face of evidence that doesn't support it.
You know genesis is quite obviously a different style of literature thatn the histories that follow in leviticus, exodus, joshu, judges, ruth. Its a very special book in style and content. Its not difficult to see where to draw the mythological truth, literal truth line. I love discussions like this...MORE please.
thanks..sa: ' You know, on the face of it thats what we look like you know, just complicated animals and that is the prevailing opinion of our age. We shouldn't raise out eyebrows in disbelief when others take it for granted. We need to know how to challenge them.
Dez: Well, There's nothing ambiguous about the scientific evidence, there are no rspected reports supporting a 5'000 year old earth made in 6, 24 hour periods. Taking the genesis story as literal is an act of faith, in the face of evidence that doesn't support it.
You know genesis is quite obviously a different style of literature thatn the histories that follow in leviticus, exodus, joshu, judges, ruth. Its a very special book in style and content. Its not difficult to see where to draw the mythological truth, literal truth line. I love discussions like this...MORE please.
Sorry, I can't explain specifics. I don't remember them, but I remember it convinced me. But here is a general aspect I got from different people.
My former Oceanography Professor talked about the Big Bang theory. He said if the Big Bang really happened, the planets and everything should still be traveling away from where the Big Bang started.
My friend, who I consider very knowledgeable, said there is yet for Science to disprove the Bible.
We had a young speaker that shared about how he wanted to reject God's existance. So he purposely researched to find proof that God didn't exist and that he didn't create the world. After furiously researching and researching, it backfired on him. He kept finding the opposite facts and evidence. There were more evidence that supported the Bible instead of disprove it. He was finally humbled, and had rededicated his heart to God. Now he wants to go to seminary and become a Pastor.
cheers blue-j,yah. I think people outside christianity have a way of idea that half the bible is full of claims that science can prove or disprove. I recon that isn't true, the Bible is not a science book. It is a collection of histories and stories the show us what God is like how people have acted in relation to God.
And actually everything is moving away from everything else in the universe, if you trace the movement back, it does reach a point.
I think I agree with Yan, hmmm. a stork down the chimney. hmmm!
Post a Comment
<< Home