Skip to comments.Does evolution contradict creationism?
Posted on 11/30/2004 3:53:55 PM PST by shubi
There are two parts to creationism. Evolution, specifically common descent, tells us how life came to where it is, but it does not say why. If the question is whether evolution disproves the basic underlying theme of Genesis, that God created the world and the life in it, the answer is no. Evolution cannot say exactly why common descent chose the paths that it did.
If the question is whether evolution contradicts a literal interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis as an exact historical account, then it does. This is the main, and for the most part only, point of conflict between those who believe in evolution and creationists.
(Excerpt) Read more at talkorigins.org ...
"And you base this belief, starting from a mediocre scientist from the 19th century who knew hardly anything about cells, nothing about DNA, who's own words about the fossil record have been falsified, and who believed in Lamarckian inheritance. Hardly a credible source to invest so much time and effort to prop up this rickety and moth-eaten theory. It's days are numbered, so is the hiding place for your unbelief. Agnostics and atheists will have to find a new way to throw rocks at God. Meanwhile many of us will give honor to God for the wonders of HIS creation. And we will marvel at the stupidity that unbelief can generate."
Darwin was a Genius. He stopped believing Lamarck after he figured out how it really worked, but he didn't come real close to understanding genetics.
No one is throwing rocks at God. I believe in God and understand evolution is a fact. We might be throwing rocks at your conception of God.
God made man in His image and man returned the favor.
As I've said before you should steer clear of humour. Invective seems to suit you better.
Although your Manhattan analogy is nothing to do with biological evolution I would point out that Manhattan is perfectly capable of replicating itself (were such a bizarre thing to be required), it does repair itself, and it does produce goods for distant cities it knows nothing about. (to see this you have to see Manhattan as a complete system, including the people in it, and its internal and external communication and transport links)
You had no point that was in any way related to the Theory of Evolution.
Biology doesn't care who or what created it. You will just have to live with that fact. I know it is tough for you, but try.
"My concept of God is based on Scripture, experiences, and observation of nature and life, and a knowledge of human history."
My concept of God is based on a study of the Bible and fact.
I prefer my unknowable God to your canned one.
"Fine...but you proselyte others into your doctrines and do not allow the truth to be taught, and you pervert and limit the biological sciences. You are the false prophets of this age."
We don't tell people "if you don't believe that Noah put all the animals on a wooden boat for a year to save them from a non-existant worldwide flood, you are not Christian".
We don't tell people that the dino bones were placed in the strata less than 10,000 years ago, or the Bible is a pack of lies.
We don't try to force people to believe things that are just contrary to observed fact.
You need to look up prosyletize. We don't want to force you to think science is fact, but it would be nice if you would actually understand the science before you attempt to argue against it.
Scientists are not prophets. Scientists do not look for God. They just observe, collect data and put it into coherent systematic principles called "theories".
"If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, 1890
"The Pharisees could say the same. Great rock throwers at God also. Your intellect is darkened, you will never come to a knowledge of God though study. It is why you are enraptured by ToE. It massages a fallen intellect but does nothing for your faith. Ask Darwin's wife."
The Pharisees could say the same. (Two can play the Pharisee game lol)
My God is impervious to rock throwing. (Two can play the literalist game ;-))
I understand science. Sorry you don't understand biology.
I don't believe in the rapture, either, sorry. How simplistic literalists took a greek word that looks like rapture and converted it into a literalist dogma boggles the mind. LOL
Unlike pagans, I do not attempt to contact dead people.
Would you pass a message to the lady for me? I understand she was a very kind and devout woman. Tell her I admire her character and the genius of her husband. Thank you.
Does any of the Jehu post that this replies to make any sense to any of you?
What the heck is "cellular intelligence"? This is a new one and I can't tell if he is making this up or if it is some new creationist crapsite talking point.
"Tell me which came first the cell nucleus with its controlled water environment, controlled temperature range all built out of proteins, or the DNA, which specifies the proteins? "
First you tell me which came first, the chicken or the egg? lol
Please PLEASE!! Get it through your head that biology doesn't care where life came from or who designed or did not design it. Biology deals with the life we have.
Creationists have injected the strawman of creation into the Theory of Evolution. Creation is NOT IN THE TOE!!!!
NADA, NOT THERE, NUNCA, NYET, LO, NO, ZERO , so please don't argue this way anymore. It just is a complete waste of your and my time.
Come up with a more interesting creationist crapsite talking point and we will discuss that. LOL
"ToE infers life arose entirely by materialistic processes."
First, as I have repeatedly instructed,creation is not in the ToE; so your use of "arose" is questionable.
Assuming you have understood what the science says in the ToE now, and that evolution only deals with "results of matter" (the definition of materialistic), I don't think you can say that and be intellectually honest.
Life IS different than minerals or chemicals just laying there. That said, you can't get science to investigate anything other than what can be observed. Science deals with practical reality.
Your belief in God is not threatened by the fact of evolution, UNLESS you interpret the Bible in such a way to be unable to accept that FACT. If as I believe, God created evolution, evolution is not entirely materialistic, is it?
Thus, your statement that evolution infers materialism is wrong.
"The story of life crawling out of the slime is all from YOUR side of the isle. Sorry but you evolutionists tarred yourself with this brush, you will have to live with the results."
No, you creationists tarred biologists with this brush. As I have repeatedly said, and I am beginning to think that you are not debating in good faith, abiogenesis and creation is not in the Theory of Evolution. IT IS NOT THERE! You are creating the essential strawman that makes your interpretation of Scripture palatable to you. Biology doesn't give a hoot about creation. Biology deals with the life we have and have had on this planet.
"If ToE pretends to explain speciation, then at what species does it start the story? Frogs? Lizards? Trilobites? Algae? Funny you guys massage this theory to AVOID and EVADE the evidence of the discoveries of science since Darwin. "
ToE does not "pretend" to explain speciation. It explains speciation insofar as our knowledge goes at this time.
ToE postulates that a single cell is the common ancestor of all life on Earth. This is a Theory incorporated in the ToE called the Theory of Common Descent. There is not as much evidence for this as there is for the fact of evolution. There are other explanations that could work, but so far all indications are that a single cell developed into all the life you see on Earth. God was pretty smart to be able to do this, wasn't he?
Uh, it is you and your buddies at AIG that ignore the science. I mean, really, you can't even accept the fact that biology doesn't care about initial creation and it is not in the ToE.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.