Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true

[edwest]

Using 3D sculpting as an example, I import an ape skeleton and a human skeleton. I can rotate them in any direction. Now, as an artist, I can manipulate the bones of the ape to be identical to those of a human. In terms of DNA instructions: shrink, change angle, shorten, modify and add. Simple computational instructions.

 

[rossum]

Individual creatures have been brought into existance as themselves. …

I asked how to falsify Intelligent Design. Your piece was not a way to falsify Intelligent Design. Please either answer the question or admit that you have no answer.

rossum

 

[Aloysium]

What is involved in discussing creation and evolution are interpretations based on knowledge of the science and the metaphysical structure of existence. One cannot falsify a mythos, a story. If the earth cannot be imagined as a globe and the landscape that spreads before oneself is all that is appreciated, it will be impossible to understand that the earth revolves around the sun. That is the fate of utilitarians; it is all about what is useful to themselves. Seeing the world through that lens, they omit the beautiful, misinterpreting what others are talking about as a sign of health. And, they cannot but fail to pursue true knowledge, focussing on “proof”, meaning usually that which can be manipulated, a reduction of what is, into the world that that their one dimensional thinking constructs. I would say that Darwinism inhibits the pursuit of knowledge that extends beyond the empirical and would tell us what really happened and who we truly are.

 

[rossum]

What is involved in discussing creation and evolution are interpretations based on knowledge of the science and the metaphysical structure of existence.

An omnipotent God can use direct or indirect methods to create, He is not limited to only one group of methods. The Bible tells us that God used indirect methods to create living organisms: “Let the waters bring forth…” and “Let the earth bring forth…”

Evolution is just such an indirect method of giving rise to the plethora of species we see today.

What of man? We know that Adam had “nostrils” before God breathed his human soul into him. If he had nostrils then at that point Adam had a physical body, albeit one which did not yet have a human soul. Evolution is perfectly capable of shaping a soulless human body.

Why do you insist on seeing an irreconcilable difference between evolution and creation? Is your omnipotent God not capable of using evolution as a tool to shape physical bodies. I think not, since that comes well within the competence of an omnipotent being.

rossum

 

[buffalo]

Eve, coming from Adam.

 

[rossum]

There is no scientific evidence against that possibility. The minimal biologically human population is more than either 1 or 2.

rossum

 

[Aloysium]

What God can do is not the same as what He does do.

He creates us directly and through indirect methods which utilize for example the inherent properties of matter as the building blocks of our material selves, organized in patterns which reflect our psychological make up.

The waters did not mould themselves into sea creatures any more than the earth moulded itself into those that inhabit the land. Within the waters fish came into being and similarly those of the land. What is described in Genesis 1 is a different perspective of the truth also presented in Genesis 2 where we hear that God formed the wild animals and the birds out of the ground, lifeless matter.

Evolution does not explain the creation of Eden, nor of those individual creatures which together constituted that paradise. It is a far-fetched belief to anyone but those who have had a daily dose of it since they were able to reason.

Within the story of Adam’s creation we find expressed several truths.

Among them is that Adam’s body was in fact directly fashioned by God in accordance with His will - designed if you will.

And, man did not arise as one of the many kinds of living things that made up Eden, but rather was placed in it, suggesting that we are a very different kind of organism.

The Garden, while representing a physical place ,is also symbolic of our relationship with God, with all creation and with one another.

Utilizing the metaphor of fruit-bearing trees, it points to our psychospiritual capacities that characterize human potentials. At the Centre of the Garden, reserved for God is the tree of the cross, the knowledge of good and evil and that of eternal life. In Adam, all humanity and all creation fell, to be saved an redeemed in Jesus Christ, the incarnation of the Word whereby all came into existence. Original sin brought death into the world; creation fell. This set the entire universe in motion on a journey along the Way that is Jesus towards communion within the Trinity.

The Spirit of God is what gives life to all, and in us reveals those qualities that make us like God, ultimately capable of the giving of ourselves for the good of what is other to our being. Like air maintains the person in life as a physical being, so too does the Spirit, at a more fundamental level keep the person in existence grounded in eternity. What I’d speculate is that God brought together, in the moment of Adams creation on a physical level, the atoms that He would form into the complex molecules that constitute a cell, each one of them having a specific role in the tissues He constructed, layered as organ systems, all working together as a lifeless collection of matter, as materialism might envision our being here and now. The human soul soul would be that which organizes that information into the unity that is person who exists as self-other.

There’s no need for an evolutionary process, as it is imagined by modern man, a distortion of what has happened in history.

I have to stop. Hopefully this has been helpful to those who’ve bothered read it.

 

[Aloysium]

The minimal biologically human population is more than either 1 or 2.

This is not the case if the original cell structures included a genome which could be recombined in a number of ways with variations all subject to epigentic factors which reflect the totality of the organism in its environment, its psychological make up and the spiritual reality of the good, the beautiful and true. Assuming evolution, one needs a population of more than one or two, which is why theistic evolution is a misunderstanding of how creation took place.

In the beginning there was an originally immortal humanity, in the form of one man and woman, from whom we all have sprung, individually created by God as expressions of our kind of being.

an irreconcilable difference between evolution and creation

Your point would be another example of the irreconcilable differences between them.

 

[Edgar]

No one wants to deal with this:

It’s too unscientific for many Catholics to accept … yet they will accept the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection and Transubstantiation. Go figure …

 

[Edgar]

I believe that Adam himself did not evolve, but was especially made by God from inorganic matter in the same way that He made the first living cell. This means that Adam’s X and Y chromosomes were also especially made, and did not come from the lower hominins. In addition, I believe that Adam and Eve were not made in the womb of a hominin, but were made adults from the beginning.

I agree - just the “last Adam” was not the result of a natural process, neither was the first Adam the result of a natural process.

 

[Edgar]

. When Genesis described the making of true humans it omits a step. We can interpret earth -> man as earth -> hominins -> man. Is that interpretation valid?

Genesis 2:7 says Adam was “formed” from the earth, then after that God breathed into his nostrils Adam “became a living being”. If Adam was the offspring of an already living being, he would have already been “living” (alive) when he was “formed” (at birth). So he was alive and kicking and later God breathed into him and he then “became a living being”? Sorry, that makes no sense.

 

[Edgar]

So why are bat wings different from bird wings and pterosaur wings different from both? Common design can explain both similarities and differences. What you need to show is a way to falsify your hypothesis of common design.

… a common designer who can also design a vast variety of creatures. No law against that, as far as I know.

 

[rossum]

… a common designer who can also design a vast variety of creatures. No law against that, as far as I know.

That is the problem with design from a scientific point of view. It cannot be falsified. If parts are the same, then that is common design. If parts are different then that is also common design. Because the designer can do anything, then it is impossible to falsify the hypothesis. An unfalsifiable hypothesis is not science; any scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable.

rossum

 

[joseie]

The basic thing to understand is that the description given in the Genesis regarding creation of earth in 6 days,creation of two great lights,creation of man from dust etc. was mainly meant for the people of those times when it was originally revealed ,who could readily accept these things with their available knowledge.The fact that Earth is round ;rotating on its axis creating day and night;revolving around the sun ;could not have been created in 6 days but took millions of years etc.were not digestible to people of that time.As and when man get more and more scientific knowledge which is also a gift of God,more and more details about the creation are revealed.It foolish to take a stand that since such and such matters relating to origin of earth,skies and man etc now found out have not been mentioned in Genesis, Either Genesis is wrong or the present kowledge is faulty.
God has given sufficient wisdom to man to understand the reason for these apparent contradictions between Bible and Science.It is therefore just amusing to read the hot arguments in favour and against Bible and Science.

 

[rossum]

The basic thing to understand is that the description given in the Genesis regarding creation of earth in 6 days,creation of two great lights,creation of man from dust etc. was mainly meant for the people of those times when it was originally revealed ,who could readily accept these things with their available knowledge.

You are correct, the Bible is not a science textbook. And here is a little play to illustrate the point:

FADE IN:

SCENE: Inside a tent in the desert. There is a small table and chair in the middle of the tent. Some baggage is stacked at the back.

Characters: GOD invisible and omnipresent. MOSES offstage.

MOSES enters the tent.

MOSES: “What a day! If I ever see another grain of sand I swear that I am goi…”

GOD: “Moses!”

MOSES: (surprised) “Yes Lord!”

GOD: “Get pen, ink and papyrus.”

MOSES goes to the baggage and fetches a pen, ink and papyrus. He takes them to the table and sits down.

GOD: “Begin writing.”

MOSES: “Yes Lord.”

GOD: “In the beginning I created a quantum fluctuation at the hyper-sub-quark level …”

MOSES: (interrupting) “Sorry Lord. Was that spelled K-W-A-H-K?”

GOD: “Hmmm. I foresee a problem. Humans will not discover hyper-sub-quarks for another 8,726 years three months and sixteen days. Perhaps something less cosmological might work better. Moses, begin a new sheet of papyrus.”

MOSES picks up a new piece of papyrus and prepares to write.

GOD: “In the beginning I created deoxyribonucleic acid …”

MOSES: (interrupting) “Sorry Lord, but could you spell that please?”

GOD: “Oy vey! Why did I make these people so dumb?”

GOD touches a finger to Moses’ forehead.

MOSES: “Ah, now I understand. Thank you for giving me all that knowledge Lord. Unfortunately I see a problem. If I write ‘deoxyribonucleic acid’ then none of the other Israelites will know what the he… heck I have written about unless you touch all their foreheads as well.”

GOD: “Hmmm. A good point Moses. Let me think about it for a few thousand years.”

MOSES: “But what do I do while I am waiting?”

GOD: “Never mind, I have finished thinking.”

MOSES: “That was never thousands of years.”

GOD: (angrily) “Do you doubt Me! Time is Mine to command. It is subject to Me, not Me to it.”

MOSES: (humbly) “Sorry Lord.”

GOD: “Start a new piece of papyrus.”

MOSES picks up a new piece of papyrus and prepares to write.

GOD: “In the beginning I created the heavens and the earth …”

FADE OUT:



rossum

 

[Aloysium]

was mainly meant for the people of those times

While Genesis was written using the metaphors and science of those days, it continues to ring true to anyone who wants to listen, who is not caught up in superficial worldly understandings, but is able to grasp the literal meaning of its words.

revolving around the sun ;could not have been created in 6 days but took millions of years etc.were not digestible to people of that time

Let’s not give ourselves too much credit. If history is a reliable source of information about where we are going, most of what is believed and taught as fact will be considered nonsense by self proclaimed “skeptics” of the future, skeptical of all but their own ideas. I put it to you that evolution is an illusion, unfalsifiable because it is just an interpretation of knowledge revealed through empirical research.

Either Genesis is wrong or the present kowledge is faulty.

Actually they totally mesh, and do so far better than the materialistic and utilitarian philosophical systems that underlie the concept of “evolution” as it is understood today, when we consider the totality of what it means to be alive, to be here present reading these words. How the science is best understood in keeping with reality, is creation.

It is therefore just amusing to read the hot arguments in favour and against Bible and Science.

I’m glad it is entertaining. I have actually found the discussion enligthening. The matter of my own existence, what it is and who I am, its meaning, the nature of this world of wonders and its origins goes back to my earliest memories and has been a driving force through my life. As we deepen in our faith, a new vision of the world emerges, where everything is centred around God. They both reveal the truth; Genesis, one that is deeper than merely the dimesion of existence that is material things which can be manipulated.

 

[Aloysium]

the Bible is not a science textbook

As evolutionary theories are not science, but rather a mythos of our time telling us who we are and where we come from, masquerading as science, promoting secular beliefs to justify modern mores. The tiles of scientific knowledge are arranged into a mosaic that presents that illusory image of what is and how we got here; they best fit one that reveals creation.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Bradskii]

rossum:

the Bible is not a science textbook

As evolutionary theories are not science, but rather a mythos of our time telling us who we are and where we come from, masquerading as science, promoting secular beliefs to justify modern mores. The tiles of scientific knowledge are arranged into a mosaic that presents that illusory image of what is and how we got here; they best fit one that reveals creation.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Aloysium]

Why did I make these people so dumb?”

As a Buddhist you should know that ignorance lies at the heart of human existence and is the ultimate cause of suffering. The fact is that we brought it onto ourselves, believing that we are gods, without God. We need only ask to take the first step on the road to truth.

 

[Aloysium]

Love is the key to ending the endless cycle.

And, that’s what creation is all about.