Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part 4.1

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
More speculation. Materialism is insufficient. The ‘blind watchmaker’ is a fictional character.
 
If by “speculation,” you mean many thousands of fossils, DNA records, phenotypical variation in living species, and common sense, then. . . I guess?

Also, in your list of blurted and totally unsupported assertions, you forgot “Fake News!” 😃
 
Last edited:
Techno2000 said:
Details please…
Click to expand...
“Let the waters bring forth…” Details please.

“Let the earth bring forth…” Details please.

“… took clay and formed…” Details please.

Currently evolution has far more detail than creation. If you want more detail, then you need to ask Bible scholars first, they are well behind on the details.

rossum
 
Hugh_Farey said:
obfuscates what is actually a very simple question.
Click to expand...
I’ve actually prepared a number of answers only to be overwhelmed by a sense of futility.

I have answered it, but you only want to hear a reflection of your own beliefs. I don’t argue with atheists about the existence of God, because it’s impossible to argue for what is obvious to someone who does not see it.

I am arguing for creation of things, from what we ultimately know immediately - the nature of our own being, what is this life in its totality. In that we find ourselves to be an image of God and an infinitely elaborated expression of the simplest things. We can understand what it means to be an atom, a single cell creature, a plant and the fathomless, truest reality that is God. This is not anything that what existed before and below us can do. Our brains allow us to do this, but it is what is at the foundation of who we are, our spirit, that makes us what we are, created by God, a new being different than all that was.

It is of supreme importance to put God at the centre of everything we do. In our understanding of matters such as this it is equally necessary. God brought this all into being. We can only go so far in understanding how, but with that focus, we grow in understanding how those theories and philosophies that either do not include him, or merely tack Him on as an appendage, fail in uncovering the truth.

I think the depth of your understanding was revealed when you wrote:
Hugh_Farey said:
I could also be persuaded if anyone could demonstrate that some animal or plant was spontaneously created ex nihilo. Perhaps we could use an empty zoo for the purpose.
Click to expand...
Really?! God is some puppet or force of nature to be manipulated?

I won’t trash this one.
 
Last edited:
benjamin1973 said:
That’s the thing that offends most: that ID proponents do not think that God could set in place a system of chance, and still fully express His will in outcome.

“Chance” is just another word for “so complex that it’s beyond human comprehension or the ability to predict.” Surely, nothing meets that definition when we’re talking about God’s intellect.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure why people holding different views offend you.
Your definition of chance sounds like Intelligent Design to me.
 
PetraG said:
40.png
Aloysium:
Assuming you are addressing the idea of macroevolution.

There is clearly diversity, expressed within the cat family in the various forms of tigers, lions, jaguars, house cats, and so on. Most of it is an artistic expression of Existence, some of it adaptive. None of it, except for genetic defects, is truly random.

Trees die off and branches grow no further. They no longer produce leaves (individual organisms). They can however sprout seeds which gives rise to new trees, each branch producing different sorts of leaves.
Click to expand...
How do you say some mutations “random” and others are chosen?

Why do you feel free to conclude that Darwin was not describing the mode of artistic expression chosen by an Almighty God who does not make arbitrary laws but rather bases all of His laws on the natural laws of cause and effect built into His creation?
Click to expand...
The laws that govern the interactions of matter do not in themselves lead to greater complexity. A higher order is required to place the building blocks together in a manner that expresses life. Consider too that life is also far more than the material. Matter is only the tip of the ontological iceberg that we are.

Life is a creative expression.

The material structure of life makes it prone to the decomposition that occurs when atoms act in accordance solely with their properties. Random mutation on a chemical level is deleterious to the organism. Toxins, viruses, radiation, and the accumulation of unrepaired glitches over time are all physical factors which affect the cell and its DNA.

There are built-in mechanisms within the cell that respond to stressors in the environment as demonstrated in NASA’s twin study that revealed that 93% of Scott Kelly’s genome had not reverted back to that of his identical brother after a year in space. These would not be random but planned attributes of living things meant to ensure survival. It is God’s planning that does this. And God brings the laws of physics into existence through the things He creates There is nothing arbitrary about this - it is all in accordance with His will.
 
Last edited:
As I’ve said all along, I don’t see evolution and God’s will as separate. I just don’t think the simplistic literalist view of the Bible is the best position. I think there’s a mechanism at work in HOW he manifests his will, and that we are allowed to figure out bits of it here and there.

Evolution is elegant because it allows a Creator God to put in place a system in which His will can express itself, but which will unfold in its own way. To me, this feels right. It is not the limitations of God, but of the imagination of Man, that man cannot see that evolution can also include completely the will of God.
 
Last edited:
Aloysium said:
The laws that govern the interactions of matter do not in themselves lead to greater complexity. A higher order is required to place the building blocks together in a manner that expresses life. Consider too that life is also far more than the material. Matter is only the tip of the ontological iceberg that we are.

Life is a creative expression.

The material structure of life makes it prone to the decomposition that occurs when atoms act in accordance solely with their properties. Random mutation on a chemical level is deleterious to the organism. Toxins, viruses, radiation, and the accumulation of unrepaired glitches over time are all physical factors which affect the cell and its DNA.

There are built-in mechanisms within the cell that respond to stressors in the environment as demonstrated in NASA’s twin study that revealed that 93% of Scott Kelly’s genome had not reverted back to that of his identical brother after a year in space. These would not be random but planned attributes of living things meant to ensure survival. It is God’s planning that does this. And God brings the laws of physics into existence through the things He creates There is nothing arbitrary about this - it is all in accordance with His will.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is what I mean.

The laws that govern the interactions of matter are themselves, 100% and with no other (name removed by moderator)ut, the handiwork of the Higher Order. Whether He chose to to create life by making it an occurence that would arise in a particular place and in a particular time of His choosing from the very first with no later Divine incursion required or whether He deemed it best to use such an incursion was utterly up to Him. Humans can only learn the laws of matter that are predictable to our ability to observe and attempt to manipulate matter to an end we choose by using the laws in some clever manner. It is practically axiomatic that the clever manipulations of humans will generate a great many surprises…we don’t understand natural law nearly so well as some like to think.

The divide between the natural and the supernatural is, let us face it, a matter of whether or not God is acting in a way we have come to find predictable or in a way we could not predict. That is why I think these people who dismiss prayers whose answer could be predicted back according to our understanding of the natural order in events that preceded the prayer are totally missing the point of how God is capable of operating.
 
Last edited:
I’m sorry to feel your sense of futility, as I have a great deal of sympathy for your philosophy, which in many ways coincides with my own. I think “you only want to hear a reflection of your own beliefs” is easy to say, but only partially true. Certainly we all want new ideas to have some connection with our beliefs, but we delight most in them if they extend our horizons, or offer new explanations for things we have found difficult. I think your exploration of the immediacy of creation, or of the idea that every millisecond of the universe’s existence is a complete creative act, is both interesting and challenging, and if this thread dwelt more on these ideas I think we would all benefit.

However, such considerations are largely incidental to the simple question of whether I am literally descended from my grand-father, or from a fish for that matter. For that, too much philosophical pondering on the nature of existence is unhelpful, and the fact that grandfathers and fish are whole and individual beings irrelevant. Examining our DNA is entirely indicative, and over long times, the fossil record is supportive.

Actually, I think you agree that the process of evolution is an accurate human interpretation of the succession of entities, each of which is an individual expression of God’s creativity, you just don’t like to see it discussed in over-materialistic terms.

As for the empty zoo, you learn nothing of the depth of my understanding from it. You have to pass through the shallows to reach the depths.

So keep up the good work!
 
Just reading through the last few posts of Benjamin1973, PetraG and Aloysium I feel that we really are exploring aspects of ‘Creation’ that none of the ‘Creationists’ have yet aspired to, and placing Evolution at the heart of Theology, rather than separate from it. The bleating of ‘vague’, ‘proof’, ‘speculation’ and ‘details please’, together with deliberately misrepresentative quotations from evolutionists, are trivial and tiresome even to Catholic theologians, but by embracing Evolution as the manifestation of Creation, we might be able to investigate the concept of Purpose, an understanding of which still eludes me.
 
Evolution is the result of imperfect replicators in a situation of resource constraints. When a computer programmer writes a program to model evolution, that is what she does: sets up a population of imperfect replicators with some sort of constraint.

Since God appears to have set up material life as a set of imperfect replicators with resource constraints, then Christians have to take it that God knew what He was doing. And with His perfect foresight He always knew what the outcome would be.

$0.02

rossum
 
[If you follow normal creationist ideas, based not on genetic but on morphological similarity, I guess you’d say they were all separate creations.]

Actually, genetics has a much better chance of telling us than just apparent features.

In fact, genetict is why the tree of life has fallen and is a tangled bush.
 
benjamin1973 said:
“Chance” is just another word for “so complex that it’s beyond human comprehension or the ability to predict.” Surely, nothing meets that definition when we’re talking about God’s intellect.
Click to expand...
Chance is used this wayL
  1. the occurrence and development of events in the absence of any obvious design.
 
benjamin1973 said:
“Goddidit” is weak. Let’s start with that as a given. The question is HOW did He do it?

Clearly, he didn’t make everything in its final form, because the forms found today are different than the forms of the past. Therefore, it was God’s intent to set Creation into motion, and then let it play out. God’s world is a dynamic one, in which change is both allowed and expected from the start.

Evolution is far more in accord with this truth than ID is. We don’t really need to go beyond the Bible to know that God intended for a progressive world.
Click to expand...
At creation everything was good. If Adam had not fallen the effects of death and decay would not be evident. The changes we see are due to God removing this protection.

Intelligent Design is a much better explanation that neatly ties science and philosophy together.

Yes, He let’s it play out. But, we cannot disregard His providence, in that He sustains it.
 
benjamin1973 said:
There’s also clearly diversity, expressed within the mammal class. There’s also clearly diversity, expressed within the animal kingdom. Branches on branches. It’s almost like. . . animals are related to different degrees based on when each branch diverged from its parent.
Click to expand...
Yes, the diversity occurs due to adaptation. It is very well programmed.

The divergence occurs when the loss of reproductive ability once had is lost. The isolation and adaptation accounts for the variation within.
 
That is against Church teaching. “unfold in its own way”? No. God guides everything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top