Creation vs. Evolution

[nebula]

Hey, His Son -

If Genesis answered everything that's been dug up, if Creationists' arguments didn't come off the way other conspiracy theorists' arguments cam off, and if Christians didn't keep trying to stop scientific investigations (like it's a sin to try to figure out what's going on in with the fossil record or exploring the universe or understanding quantum physics) - then there wouldn't be a problem.

I can't anymore say, "I don't believe a certain scientific conclusion" just because "it isn't in the Bible." Many scientifically-minded people equate Christianity with ignorance - and they point to the incident with Galileo as an example (his findings violated the Scripture that the Sun and Moon revolve around the Earth - therefore he's wrong and must be excommunicated - granted there is more to the story than just that, but that's how they perceive things). Try witnessing to a person with that barrier! How will you reach out to the person to try to remove the veil against Jesus from their eyes?

I am looking for the truth - I just can't go with "just because" anymore.

And I don't see the conflict like you do because I cannot perceive Gen. 1 as a scientific account when science was not in existance at the time of the writing. If I thought the purpose of Gen. 1 were to reveal the natural world, I'd hold on to it hook-line-and-sinker; but I am thinking that the purpose of Gen. 1 is to reveal God, the Lord.

If I'm wrong for this scientific journey of understanding - I've been praying lots and lots about this - Lord please reveal the truth to me. So far, I've not gotten any kind of revelation or sign or anything. But I have to search these things out because this is my field.

And I'm tired of seeing Christians throwing out what I have learned to be stupid and pointless arguments.

Again, I have not been posting here to try to "preach evolution." As I have said, which I hope you have seen, I have a better idea of what they are saying and where the holes are in how they present their info than I did before I had to study this. It burdens me when Christians argue the wrong things based on incorrect knowledge of the theory and current understanding. It just makes us all look like a bunch of idiots.

My argument is that if you are going to defend Creationism - get it right!

And telling me that I'm in sin for researching this stuff - then how is a Christian to be a biologist out in the field (apart form AIG et al)? The concept of "things change" and "things in an ecological system are interconnected to each other" - which are the key themes of evolution - are the whole foundation to biological studies.

Can you show me from AIG or Creation Research Institute a non-evolutionary bioilogical toxonomy system that categorizes organisms better than the current one? I mean, what am I to do with that? Quit my degree and get a job at Wal-Mart?

Newton considered understanding calculus as "understanding the language of God" - it's amazing how many processes can be put through mathematical formulas. Is studying calculus now to be considered a sin because it's going into understanding "how God does things?"

Understanding genetics and the fossil record may have nothing to do with your ecucation and profession - but it has to do with mine. The Creation-Evolution debate may have no impact on your life - but I have to deal with it, I have to live with it, and I have to suffer anti-religious bigotry because of it. This is why it burdens me for Christians to get the arguments right - the incorrect ones make it hard on Christians in scientific discussions. Christianity is seen as a persecuter and destroyer of knowledge and progress. You want to try defending that in a scientific setting?! It's horrible! And I've been hurt by it.

Just like I am getting hurt now.

I think I'm going to leave these discussions alone from now on.

Edited March 27, 2004 by nebula

[nebula]

I may be wrong, but I think maybe, just maybe, our very own sister Neb is playing a little devils advocate here. I hope that's all it is. If not, oh boy...

Mostly - yeah.

I'm not saying I believe in evolution the way most Christains understand evolution to mean.

I have learned that there are many aspects of it that really have no reason to be faught against just because it falls under the tag of "evolution." Other aspects, I don't see how it fits, but I have to "go with the program" so to speak to see where it's going - and I have my reservations - and I don't understand how it all fits with the "traditional Genesis" account - and I'm oK with leaving it at that. I can understand how others aren't OK with that, and I can understand that.

It gets difficult being a Christian in the science field when both sides are so antagonistic to each other - and lots of that has to do with misunderstanding each other. I've tried to defend Christianity on the science board just as I've tried to defend science on the Christian board.

I'm giving up on both accounts.

[Guest LCPGUY]

It gets difficult being a Christian in the science field when both sides are so antagonistic to each other - and lots of that has to do with misunderstanding each other. I've tried to defend Christianity on the science board just as I've tried to defend science on the Christian board.

I'm giving up on both accounts.

Oh Neb... What can I say???

Maybe you are pursuing the wrong field, I don't know? Probably not though. God has you in that field for a reason.

I do know that you are a mighty lady of the Lord. Maybe you should consider just living by faith and using your considerable talents to support the Lord. Maybe???? Have you prayed about that?

You are so gifted. Don't use those gifts in the wrong area. If you want to become so educated on science, that is fine. Why not use that knowledge and IQ of yours to promote God?

Why are you so intent upon proving/disproving creation? You can't! As good as you are, you are not God, and you don't have His mind.

Also, you will never, ever, win anything other than a debate with a secular scientist. You will never bring him/her to the Lord. Nor will anyone else. Only the Holy Spirit will do that. Is that all that matters, winning a debate?

By faith, plant the seed. God will grow it.

I hope you continue to increase your knowledge. But let that increase be in God's word. You will never understand His power, His holiness, His majesty - 'tll you meet Him face to face that is.

You have brought up micro-organisms, medicine etc. Yes that is good. So is astronomy, etc. But I pray you don't spend too much time on trying to figure out how God CREATED things. It will NEVER happen. Put your considerable talent, that the Lord gave you, to better use.

Love you Neb, God bless you and use you so richly in His service, :hug:

John :il:

[artsylady]

Neb:

If Genesis answered everything that's been dug up, if Creationists' arguments didn't come off the way other conspiracy theorists' arguments cam off, and if Christians didn't keep trying to stop scientific investigations (like it's a sin to try to figure out what's going on in with the fossil record or exploring the universe or understanding quantum physics) - then there wouldn't be a problem.

Creationists are not agains studying the fossil record or exploring the universe. They just don't agree with the end conclusions. They believe the dating methods are incorrect. There are many examples of the universe showing a young earth. There are many examples of fossils showing evidence of a flood. Most creationists love science but find evolution to be bad science. And there are conspiracies. I can't remember which museum has a display of Lucy, showing her with human-like hands and feet. The creationists wrote to the museum and told them that they should not display her that way, and the museum told them blatantly that they knew it was not accurate, but they didn't care. This is true. If you need more info, it can be provided. What about the hominid (Nebraska man?) which were later discovered to be based on a pig's tooth? A pig's tooth??? This example may not be a 'conspiracy' but do you call THIS good science?

I am looking for the truth - I just can't go with "just because" anymore.

Nor should you.

Can you show me from AIG or Creation Research Institute a non-evolutionary bioilogical toxonomy system that categorizes organisms better than the current one? I mean, what am I to do with that? Quit my degree and get a job at Wal-Mart?

A creationist devised the original and current system of classification.

Is studying calculus now to be considered a sin because it's going into understanding "how God does things?"

Of course it's not a sin. This makes me wonder where you get your information on creationists and what they do.

Understanding genetics and the fossil record may have nothing to do with your ecucation and profession - but it has to do with mine. The Creation-Evolution debate may have no impact on your life - but I have to deal with it, I have to live with it, and I have to suffer anti-religious bigotry because of it.

Yes, there is much anti-religious bigotry in the scientific community.

Just like I am getting hurt now.

I haven't jumped in the discussion lately , but I don't understand how you're being hurt. I personally apologize if I've said something to offend you.

[artsylady]

Nebula:

This was posted on the other thread.

From March 15(I think)) NY Times, regarding a new fossil that has people once again re-writing their 'solid' theories.

The material is so fragmentary," he said, "that we really can't know, and so our differences often are a reflection of different philosophies and experience in research."

Dr. Alan Walker, an anatomist at Pennsylvania State University who specializes in hominid research but was not involved in the kadabba analysis, said that too few fossils had been discovered to justify either interpretation. He noted that it was easy to be misled by variations that are normal within the fossil collections of any single species.

People who believe in a bushy family tree will look for bushiness in their fossils, and those who don't won't," Dr. Walker said in an interview. "We are generalizing far too much, with not very many fossils spread over a long period of time."[/QUOTE]

This is TYPICAL of what happens when a new fossil is found but there are a lot of interesting admissions here.

Hopefully the link still works if you want to read the entire story.

--------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/05/science/05HUMA.html

[nebula]

I'm studying to be a science teacher.

[artsylady]

Like many things in science, Darwin got the ball rolling (well, actually, it didn't start with him - but he got it into the forefront) but the theory has since been re-worked, refined, re-configured, altered, built on, etc. from the original proposition.

That's right. It's still constantly being re-worked, refined, reconfigured, altered and built upon. The one thing we know for sure that is evolving is the theory of evolution itself. It was accepted during Darwin's lifetime without a lot of evidence. The evidence put forth for evolution which was used to teach evolution in public schools in the Scopes trial has since been thrown out.

Is there a single evolutionary theory that all evolutionists can agree on? There is nothing concrete, even among evolutionists. They still all disagree with dates, which species came from what etc, etc. Despite all of the many theories that contradict each other - they still all believe one thing - that evolution happened.

[nebula]

Just had to add one thing I forgot.

One species becoming another has been observed.

A species of a genus becoming a new genus, a species of a family becoming a new family, a species of an order becoming a new order, a species of an order becoming a new order, a species of a class becoming a new class - these changes have not been observed.

These things are "macro-evolution." These are the things true-blood evolutionists say must have happened in the past, yet they will wiggle out of admitting to any of this happening, or our seeing this happening, again. It's very weird.

If you can figure out how to successfully corner them on this, you might get somewhere.

I leave this as my closing comment.

[txpaleo]

Hey Nebula,

You hit the nail on the head and I'm with you and I hope you know that. I do have more in depth answers, I just hate having to type them all out, so I usually just gloss over it on these messeage boards, since I usually do it while at the office..lol. The information on Lucy does take into account the type of breakage to her pelvis, but it really doesnt' have to, because as a bone specilist you can essentially erase that imprint and still extrapolate the way it would have appeared without the animal print. And the Neandertal issue, I have quotes and studies from a whole notebook of scientist on that one with 90% of them being secular and not religious. I know where you are coming from and I've been there. Like I said before, when I didn't know Christ I was the poster child for this debate and took great pride in shutting up Christians, because they couldn't answer the questions. Thats why I have made this my ministry, I have a strong calling from God on this one, which is where my book came from. That was nothing but God working through me and it was a long process. I hope you stay on with part of this. I know how made creationist can get when you tell them that they cant defend the faith, I deal with it all the time. As a matter of fact, I just did at church when I was answering some questions. But this is the path that God has put me on. So know I struggle with my job as an archaeologist who believes in Creation, what a combo.

God bless and I will pray for you and please pray for me..this is no easy task

Steve Baird

Creation of man

[Guest LCPGUY]

I leave this as my closing comment.

Sorry Neb, after reading your PM I now understand where you are coming from. I completely misunderstood your position.

Keep up the good work!

John :il:

Edited March 27, 2004 by lcpguy