Creation vs Evolution - Curious

[fhjmom]

I would find it very difficult to accept this. Could God do it? Sure. But would he? Would he deliberately lead us to believe something that is not true?

 

I have 'run the gauntlet' as far as my belief in the accuracies of the Genisis account and what I believe in evolution. I have a teaching degree in Biology from a major state univesity that is a leader in the world in scientific research. I hold my beliefs now based on what I know to be true of God and after much reading on the 'science' of evolution. I have found many sources that question the validity of the 'scientific' support of evolution. Many things that are used to support evolution are just plainly not good science. If they were proposed for the first time today, it just wouldn't hold up to the scientific standards of today's scientific process. But because so much of science has 'hung their hat' on evolutionary ideas and anyone who dares question them is labeled as a crackpot or religous nut by fellow scientists, then it makes it very hard to question the status-quo and still work in the field of science and be taken seriously. Some of those things published even today in lower level mainstream textbooks as support of evolution have even been shown to be completely false, yet they are still being fed to our children as fact.

 

I do believe in natural selection and micro-evolution, but to take these principles and make the jump to macr-evolution is bad science that has no support of proof. In fact, as more is known about genetics and DNA sequencing, there is more proof against the idea but again, not one that is widely publicized because the scientific community approaches the information as trying to find an explaination to make it fit within the theory of evolution, instead of the other way around (seeing if the data supports the theory and if it doesn't, discard the theory).

 

Now as far as the literal 6-days, I do believe God at His word. I used to be a day = a period of time" believer. I am now a literal Young Earth Creationists. One of the changes for me came in a discussion of these things with our singles pastor. He asked me a question, "What was Jesus' first public miracle?" I was really confused b/c I didn't see the correlation between that and creation, but I answered, "When he turned water into wine." The point here is that Jesus made something in the blink of an eye that we, in our human understanding, 'know' can only be made by fermentation which takes TIME. And not only a little time, but because the scripture says it was the 'best' wine, it meant it had been fermented even longer. Everyone at the party automatically assumed this wine had been fermented for a very long time and understandable so based on their understanding of how the world works, yet only minutes before, it had been water until touched by the Lord. I don't think He 'deliberately misled' the people at the feast (nor us in creating the world); I do think it is yet another display of His power and holiness.

 

I do not judge those that have a different interpretation, because I come fulll circle and at some point have believed almost every degree of creation vs. evolution that is possible.

[MomtoCandJ]

I'm a Christian who voted other. I believe that the Big Bang happened as science says it does, and all life came out of that and eventually evolved into what we have today-but I believe that God made the Big Bang happen and knew exactly how things would progress. I believe that the creation story in Genesis is a figurative story, written how it was because at the time that the Bible was written, humans could not understand the science behind how the world came to be.

 

I voted Christian but believe in evolution, but this is what I really believe :) :iagree:

[WishboneDawn]

Being picky I'd say I'm a Christian and I accept that Evolution best explains the evidence that we've uncovered so far. I don't "believe" in evolution. I save belief for matters of faith and trust like religion and relationships.

[silliness7]

 

Now as far as the literal 6-days, I do believe God at His word. I used to be a day = a period of time" believer. I am now a literal Young Earth Creationists. One of the changes for me came in a discussion of these things with our singles pastor. He asked me a question, "What was Jesus' first public miracle?" I was really confused b/c I didn't see the correlation between that and creation, but I answered, "When he turned water into wine." The point here is that Jesus made something in the blink of an eye that we, in our human understanding, 'know' can only be made by fermentation which takes TIME. And not only a little time, but because the scripture says it was the 'best' wine, it meant it had been fermented even longer. Everyone at the party automatically assumed this wine had been fermented for a very long time and understandable so based on their understanding of how the world works, yet only minutes before, it had been water until touched by the Lord. I don't think He 'deliberately misled' the people at the feast (nor us in creating the world); I do think it is yet another display of His power and holines

 

 

I had never thought about Jesus' first miracle and it's implications regarding TIME. That is amazing! Thank you for sharing that.

[Geek]

Your point (well, Popper's point essentially),

Yes, Karl Popper. :001_smile:

 

Science poses theories that can be disproved. Religion does not.

 

The key here is the direction, in my opinion. If you're religious, you move from a preexisting claim onto the world; if you adhere to science as an explanatory model of the world, you start with the world and build claims from the world, not the other way round.

Ding ding ding.

 

And of course, then there's the issue of the method. Religious positions sometimes even go as far to negate scientific method as science deals only with the observable portion of the world while religion claims an insight into non-observable and non-verifiable which changes the picture.

They remove themselves from legitimate scrutiny. When Mother Teresa's admission of agnosticism that looks a lot like atheism is used by The Powers That Be to "demonstrate" further proof of God's reality--since he is just bringing about a "dark night of the soul" for her betterment--how can the thing be disproved? It has made itself untouchable.

 

When we teach science and religion, we make sure to start from these points.

Just curious: do you bring in the point that many religious are allowing for a different definition of "knowledge"? i.e. subjective experience can be seen as a form of "knowledge" by some.

 

ETA: We actually do teach Judaism, even though we're technically not religious, but that's for heritage, philosophy and Jewish literacy rather than from a believer's point of view.

Interesting. Same here, only Catholic. Do you attend services?

[Geek]

Being picky I'd say I'm a Christian and I accept that Evolution best explains the evidence that we've uncovered so far. I don't "believe" in evolution. I save belief for matters of faith and trust like religion and relationships.

This is curious to me. Do you believe that the sun will come up tomorrow? Do you believe that if you drop something it will fall?

 

From where I sit, one cannot choose to believe. Belief is what naturally follows from the intellect being convinced of something, imperfect as that process can be.

[HRAAB]

Well, I am all over the place with this so I chose "other".

 

It seems to me that some sort of Divine Intelligence, which may be called God, created not just this planet but all of creation. We are not separate from that creation/intelligence but an innate part of it- nothing is separate from it, it is not possible for anything to be separate from it, from God- but we humans make a good job of pretending we are.

 

It seems to me that some sort of evolutionary process is naturally built into creation. It seems to me that the Biblical 7 days of creation may be metaphorical and not necessarily opposing to the concept of evolution, if taken on a huge time scale barely conceivable to us and not taken so literally.

 

However, I do know very clearly that I don't know and can't possibly know, and i dont believe anyone else can possible "know", what the truth is as regards how it all started. We can guess. We can make educated guesses even. However we are too much a small part of the whole of existence and it is not our privilege to know.

I am at peace with that not knowing and am not going to create artificial beliefs to feel secure within the huge amount we simply don't know.

 

I teach my kids evolution because it makes sense and the evidence seems to point that way. It doesnt mean we claim to understand or know it all, or that if more evidence comes along to dispute all or parts of evolutionary theory, we won't be open to it. Its not a religious belief for us- we dont "believe" in evolution like Christians "believe" that Jesus came to save them. So to most evolutionists, the issue is not on the same platform as it is to Creationists.

 

More or less sums it up for me. I do not 'believe' in evolution as though it were a religion. It's science; new discoveries and our understanding will change.

 

As for creation, I 'believe' that we are in creation (god) and creation (god) is in us - impossible to separate.

[Geek]

More or less sums it up for me. I do not 'believe' in evolution as though it were a religion. It's science; new discoveries and our understanding will change.

But you do *accept* evolution? Is that a better verb, in you opinion?

 

As for creation, I 'believe' that we are in creation (god) and creation (god) is in us - impossible to separate.

 

Pantheist? :001_smile:

[HRAAB]

But you do *accept* evolution? Is that a better verb, in you opinion?

 

Pantheist? :001_smile:

 

Yes, accept is a better word.

 

Panentheist. :001_smile:

[Geek]

Yes, accept is a better word.

 

Panentheist. :001_smile:

Hmm. It's my understanding that what you describe

As for creation, I 'believe' that we are in creation (god) and creation (god) is in us - impossible to separate.

is indeed pantheism. Panentheism is actually very similar to what Orthodox Christians believe. It acknowledges that god is outside of the universe, that the world "is in God". On the other hand, pantheism says that the universe and god are equivalent and inseparable.

 

Here's the wiki.

 

Did I misunderstand you? :001_smile:

[SnowWhite]

I believe in creation...but not a 7 day creation.

 

I believe God has his own timetable :)

:iagree:

 

Hoo boy.

 

Some will take issue with the wording of your question.

 

It's possible to believe in a "7-day creation as it is told in Genesis" but argue that "day" may or may not be defined as 24 hours.

:001_smile: