J
JosephSharon
Guest
I’ve always been an evolutionist. I’ve always ascribed to whatever the mainstream scientific thought was. The thought of evolution, however, has always greatly disturbed me to no end. That being said, I do not think that the theory of evolution is at all opposed to the religion or the existence of a creator. I’ve always felt that God created the universe billions of years ago, which led to the formation of planets and all the other matter in the universe. He then created the first single-cellular organisms and allowed evolution to take effect. He may or may not have guided or participated in this process.
As I said, the thought of evolution and that homo sapiens have evolved from an animal that is similar in appearance to a giant rat with a long tail has always disturbed me greatly. Therefore, today I came to a determination: For the benefit of my mental health, I shall “blow macroevolution out of the water”, by listening to every critique and criticism of the Theory of Evolution, until I convince myself that it is invalid. That is what I did.
Firstly, let me state that I feel that the Book of Genesis is meant to be interpreted entirely allegorically. I do not believe that any of the events in the Genesis actually occurred: Neither the “Flood” nor “Adam and Eve” nor “the Exodus”. I could never learn to be a biblical fundamentalist or literalist.
I suppose what I have become today would be termed as a “progressive creationist.” I approach this theory not as a Christian (which I am), but as a deist - one who believes in the existence of a Creator. What I now believe is that there has never been any macroevolution. I don’t believe that evolution has led to the creation of any new species. I don’t believe that “Species A” evolved into “Species B”, which evolved into “Species C.” I believe that “Species A” was created at one point and that “Species B” was created hundreds of millions or billions of years later, and that “Species C” was created some time after that - and then some of those species went extinct. However, I believe in microevolution - changes within species, such as the changes seen in dog breeding and birds developing beaks of different shapes through the generations.
Now I must find a way to differentiate myself from Christian fundamentalists, biblical literalists, and “Young Earth” creationists. There are people who believe that the earth is 6,000 years-old and that there is scientific evidence for the “Flood.” I do not want to be included in the same lot as these people and that is my fear in labeling myself any kind of a “creationist” - albeit a “progressive” one at that.
As I said, I now believe that all the species on earth were created at different times throughout the history of our planet. That begs the question, however, how those species spontaneously came into existence. There is no way that this can be said without sounding silly and unscientific, but I cannot think of any other way for them to come into existence in my model, than for them to simply “materialize” some place on the planet.
As I said, there is no possible way for me to take literally “Adam and Eve.” Can anyone come up with an alternative to or a better way of saying the last sentence of the previous paragraph? Could any of you ascribe to the model that i’ve created?
Thank You
As I said, the thought of evolution and that homo sapiens have evolved from an animal that is similar in appearance to a giant rat with a long tail has always disturbed me greatly. Therefore, today I came to a determination: For the benefit of my mental health, I shall “blow macroevolution out of the water”, by listening to every critique and criticism of the Theory of Evolution, until I convince myself that it is invalid. That is what I did.
Firstly, let me state that I feel that the Book of Genesis is meant to be interpreted entirely allegorically. I do not believe that any of the events in the Genesis actually occurred: Neither the “Flood” nor “Adam and Eve” nor “the Exodus”. I could never learn to be a biblical fundamentalist or literalist.
I suppose what I have become today would be termed as a “progressive creationist.” I approach this theory not as a Christian (which I am), but as a deist - one who believes in the existence of a Creator. What I now believe is that there has never been any macroevolution. I don’t believe that evolution has led to the creation of any new species. I don’t believe that “Species A” evolved into “Species B”, which evolved into “Species C.” I believe that “Species A” was created at one point and that “Species B” was created hundreds of millions or billions of years later, and that “Species C” was created some time after that - and then some of those species went extinct. However, I believe in microevolution - changes within species, such as the changes seen in dog breeding and birds developing beaks of different shapes through the generations.
Now I must find a way to differentiate myself from Christian fundamentalists, biblical literalists, and “Young Earth” creationists. There are people who believe that the earth is 6,000 years-old and that there is scientific evidence for the “Flood.” I do not want to be included in the same lot as these people and that is my fear in labeling myself any kind of a “creationist” - albeit a “progressive” one at that.
As I said, I now believe that all the species on earth were created at different times throughout the history of our planet. That begs the question, however, how those species spontaneously came into existence. There is no way that this can be said without sounding silly and unscientific, but I cannot think of any other way for them to come into existence in my model, than for them to simply “materialize” some place on the planet.
As I said, there is no possible way for me to take literally “Adam and Eve.” Can anyone come up with an alternative to or a better way of saying the last sentence of the previous paragraph? Could any of you ascribe to the model that i’ve created?
Thank You
