Educate me
- Thread starter willie
- Start date
Tonio
Asperger's Poster Child
A couple of years ago, Wired Magazine did a fascinating article about science and religion. It was the December 2002 or January 2003 issue, I think (haven't found it online). It said that physicists not only don't squirm at the question of God, but they also have regular conversations with theologians about it. Physicists know that modern hypotheses about physics can't explain some things in the universe. Not that they're out to prove (or disprove) the existence of a Supreme Being--it's more about running up against the limitations of what the human brain can comprehend. By contrast, biologists and creationists have bloody grudge matches about evolution.Railroad said:
Club'nBabySeals
Where are my pants?
There is a huge difference between facts and theories.
Isaac Newton provided a theory to account for gravity. It worked very well, but when Einstein came along, he provided refinements to account for phenomena unknown to Newton.
The Newtonian theory is perfectly good, as far as it goes. Einstein took it further, but that is no reason to disregard Newton.
Similarly, Darwin provided a theory to account for evolution. and it was so good that there has been no reason to abandon it; indeed, it even accounts for what we know about DNA - and Darwin didn't know there was such a thing as DNA. But this does not mean to say Darwin's theory is the last word; indeed, it is being refined all the time. That's the beauty of science.
That homid fossils have been found is a fact. Facts never change. Therefore the existence of those fossils will always be a fact. Theories however are not facts. Theories are interpretations of facts. As new facts are obtained and we gain more knowledge our theories become refined.
Creationism is not a theory because it doesn't deal with facts. It deals with assertions and circumstantially sidesteps facts. Even if evolutionists are wrong it takes a leap of of faith to get from not believing in evolution to believing in creationism. You can claim that evolution doesn't exist and that hominids were either apes or humans but never transitional stages between the two. However where from that---scientifically speaking---do we get to Genesis must be correct? Even if you're right about evolution at best you have created a gap in our knowledge. You might as well claim that if you can disprove evolutionary theory it must mean that we are the dandruff of Zeus.
Evolution does not assume anything about the creation of life. Evolution is about how the various species developed over millions of years. Evolution is not dependent on whether the first life form was created by chance or by a deity. One can believe in evolution and in deism. I've known many religious people who believe in evolution. That they don't believe in the biblical myth of creation (i.e. The Book of Genesis) does not mean that they are not religious. It means they are not what you and I would define as Christian.
Evolution is not a synonym for non-theism. Evolution is not a theory on the orgination of life. Evolution neither seeks to prove, nor disprove abiogenesis.....rather it is a theory which asserts that based on factual evidence pertaining to existing fossil remains, and proven laws of genetics, that all species are the product of adaptation.
The only claim that evolutionists are making is that species can change into other species over long periods of time.Evolution makes no claims about the existence or non-existence of a deity. It does challenge the Biblical account on the origination of humans. But a challenge on the Biblical creation myth is not the same as an attack on theism. I think this is the main miscommunication that results in so many Christians being against the teaching of evolution in schools.
Evolution flys in the face of creation.Club'nBabySeals said:
It does not say that God created a one celled creature and it evolved into man. It says "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." and it says "God created man in his own image". If a Christian believes evolution, then he cannot believe the Bible as the divinely inspired word of God. Either the word of God is Truth or it is a lie. God either created the universe and all things in it including man in 6 days or He didn't. Evolution calls God a liar by saying the account of creation in the Bible is not true. Evolution says God was an prehistoric ape.
Last edited:
2A, those are some harsh words about exactly how and why we should believe things...I can see why Christianity has branched into so many different sects.
I believe that God created us in his own image. I believe that He inspired his prophets on earth to write the stories of his works. This last part is combined with my belief that he inspired the prophets to write so that the people of that time could understand his works. Recall the Book of Genesis describes the world as being placed on columns and that it was surrounded by water, which was allowed in when windows in the sky were opened. Of course that was disproven because we had a new knowledge of the world and the universe.
Look, the theory of evolution is science's way of tracking God's creation of us in his own image. Seven days is a period of time that was broadly used to help ancient peoples understand. I mean if you hold so true to seven days...then you must also believe that Jesus was in the desert for exactly forty days, you must believe that the Great Flood lasted exactly forty days. You must believe that the Israelites traveled through the desert for exactly forty days. I think that these periods of times were just generalities to express "a long time." Don't hold to the Bible so stiffly...understand what it is meant to express, not exactly the way it's worded. At least that is how I conceptualize the Bible in my own personal journey of faith.
Plus, 2A how do you reconcile the fact that the world is millions of years old while the Bible concludes that it is only 6,000 years old?
I believe that God created us in his own image. I believe that He inspired his prophets on earth to write the stories of his works. This last part is combined with my belief that he inspired the prophets to write so that the people of that time could understand his works. Recall the Book of Genesis describes the world as being placed on columns and that it was surrounded by water, which was allowed in when windows in the sky were opened. Of course that was disproven because we had a new knowledge of the world and the universe.
Look, the theory of evolution is science's way of tracking God's creation of us in his own image. Seven days is a period of time that was broadly used to help ancient peoples understand. I mean if you hold so true to seven days...then you must also believe that Jesus was in the desert for exactly forty days, you must believe that the Great Flood lasted exactly forty days. You must believe that the Israelites traveled through the desert for exactly forty days. I think that these periods of times were just generalities to express "a long time." Don't hold to the Bible so stiffly...understand what it is meant to express, not exactly the way it's worded. At least that is how I conceptualize the Bible in my own personal journey of faith.
Plus, 2A how do you reconcile the fact that the world is millions of years old while the Bible concludes that it is only 6,000 years old?
Tonio
Asperger's Poster Child
There's nothing inherently wrong with 2A being a Biblical literalist. Now, when people start using Biblical literalism as the basis of government policy (such as teaching the Creation story from Genesis as scientific fact), that's a whole different issue.rraley said:
I see much of the Bible as metaphor and teaching story. I've written before that I see the first chapters of Genesis as allegories about the human race developing sentience. Whether Genesis is literal or allegorical, is that really relevant to the individual Christian's journey of faith and experience of salvation?
I don't believe the world is millions of years old. I used to; then I started investigating. Ever heard the term GIGO, garbage in garbage out? If the data that goes into an equation is bad, then the result is also bad. There are several areas where the various dating methods use data or "constants" that have a range that are selected at one of their extremes rather than the median. I find that methodology incorrect.
Yes, I believe God accomplished creation in six day and that Jesus stayed in the wilderness for 40 days and that Jonah was swallowed by a great fish. Man tries to understand God, beyond man's comprehension, with explanations that our puny minds can rationalize. God is not rationalizable We cannot comprehend infinite; it is beyond our grasp. God has infinite wisdom and power and is infinite. How do we comprehend that? I can't and don't presume to. I take the word of God as absolute Truth. To do less is to cast doubt on all of the Bible. I have stated this numerous times. If one portion, any portion of the Bible is not correct, then it is not trustworthy and the promise of salvation is just as untrustworthy. In my opinion, you cannot pick and choose what parts are Truth and what parts are not.
Do I believe the dinosaurs existed? Yes. Do I think it was millions of years ago? No. There have been human foot prints found in tyrannosaurus tracks meaning they were made at the same time. But most scientists choose to ignore these fossil records because they do not fit their preconceive thoughts.
Paleontology and geology use circular reasoning. An artifact is so old because it is found in a certain rock layer, but the rock layer is so old because certain artifacts are found in it. Circular reasoning proves nothing.
Maybe I am stupid by the ways of the world, but I would rather believe God and His word over the word of man any day. Remember the best scientists once thought the world was flat.
Yes, I believe God accomplished creation in six day and that Jesus stayed in the wilderness for 40 days and that Jonah was swallowed by a great fish. Man tries to understand God, beyond man's comprehension, with explanations that our puny minds can rationalize. God is not rationalizable We cannot comprehend infinite; it is beyond our grasp. God has infinite wisdom and power and is infinite. How do we comprehend that? I can't and don't presume to. I take the word of God as absolute Truth. To do less is to cast doubt on all of the Bible. I have stated this numerous times. If one portion, any portion of the Bible is not correct, then it is not trustworthy and the promise of salvation is just as untrustworthy. In my opinion, you cannot pick and choose what parts are Truth and what parts are not.
Do I believe the dinosaurs existed? Yes. Do I think it was millions of years ago? No. There have been human foot prints found in tyrannosaurus tracks meaning they were made at the same time. But most scientists choose to ignore these fossil records because they do not fit their preconceive thoughts.
Paleontology and geology use circular reasoning. An artifact is so old because it is found in a certain rock layer, but the rock layer is so old because certain artifacts are found in it. Circular reasoning proves nothing.
Maybe I am stupid by the ways of the world, but I would rather believe God and His word over the word of man any day. Remember the best scientists once thought the world was flat.