thread: Do you believe in evolution or what your holy book says?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Registered User

    Dec 2005
    6,706

    Epacris, it seems to me that evolution on that level is fine. But taking evolution as life spontaneously sprang out of the primordial soup and bacteria single-celled organisms suddenly became far more comples and humans descended from apes is a bit more... Extreme, I guess. The earlier one I would call adaptation - the differences are relatively small. The differences some claim in life evolving from nothing are huge and just implausible to me. I can accept one, I cannot accept the other.

    BW

  2. #2
    Registered User

    Aug 2007
    Sydney
    1,691

    OK so it's my turn to crack open the please, please understand, I am not trying to be deliberately argumentative, I am genuinely interested in having a conversation, so I can increase the depth of my understanding and compassion and consideration for all.

    I'm with Nelle on the worldview - faith is life. What I believe about God and the Bible inpacts the way I live and the way I think about everything. And really, evolutionary science works the same way. If you believe that life evolved and that humans are "high apes", it impacts the way you think about the world and everything else in life.
    I am really unsure of what you are saying here. Are you saying that Christianity and science are mutually exclusive, you just can't be both?

    Is human life sacred? Is there absolute truth?
    Again, I really have no idea what you mean? You don't have to be religious AT ALL to value the sanctity of human life? And truth? And just because you are a Christian, it doesn't mean you a "good" person, likewise, not all atheists are evil?

    To return to the evolution thing briefly - development and speciallization within a species is evident. I'm not denying that. However, when these things happen, information is LOST. New information is not created. Diversity was possible within the genetic code of the creature, and due to environmental circumstances, individual animals with certain traits had the advantage over others, and so that trait became dominant, and the other genetic information was lost over time, or preserved in another variety of that species, living in different circumstances. I believe this is sometimes called micro-evolution. Macro-evolution, in which fish become birds, for example, and new genetic information is created, is an entirely different thing, and that is what evolution is based on. I do not believe this ever happened.
    I just wanted to say that this is not scientifically correct and not the experience that I have, as a scientist, working with endangered species, populations and ecological communities out in the field. I am not some boffin in a lab mixing brightly coloured liquids together. I am out there in the bush formulating and implementing rehabilitation plans, counting and collecting (with the appropriate licenses of course) making sure these species are preserved for posterity (as dead samples in a herbarium) because they are on the brink of extinction. I hope so much that I don't see it (extinction) in my lifetime, but unfortunately I fear I will.

    And anyone who says Richard Dawkins hasn't turned evolution into a religion obviously hasn't read those books of his! I can see fanaticism on both sides of the argument from various people and that's why I'll defend the other side to the hilt.
    I totally agree, atheists can be just as fundamental as any fundamentalists from any religion.

    It's a fascinating and interesting study, but I just can't believe that we started from goo with NO extra help. That just seems crazy.
    Also, I think you are all well aware now that I hold Darwin and his wako theory very close to my heart and soul. How would you feel if I said: "Believing in God (or insert you chosen spiritual being here) just seems crazy." And please know that I am posing this question (how would you feel?) in an effort to evoke some sensitivity and compassion, seeing as this is in the general religion section and not in the Christianity section. I would NEVER actually say that to anyone about what they believe.

    And JIC you're worrying about me and how I'm feeling, I'm fine, really, I'm just asking.

  3. #3
    Registered User

    Nov 2005
    Ontario, Canada
    1,624

    Hmmm.... having some trouble with the quote thing here. Hope it's still sort of understandable!


    "I am really unsure of what you are saying here. Are you saying that Christianity and science are mutually exclusive, you just can't be both?"

    No, what I am saying is that my faith is the way I look at everything in life. It is the foundation. It determines truth in every area. So, if I have a belief based on the Bible, which is in conflict with what a scientist or whoever else is telling me, I will stick with the Bible. I believe that the Bible contains the real truth, and that "true" science will never contradict it. God wrote the Bible, and God made the world. There can be no contradictions.


    "Again, I really have no idea what you mean? You don't have to be religious AT ALL to value the sanctity of human life? And truth? And just because you are a Christian, it doesn't mean you a "good" person, likewise, not all atheists are evil?"

    No, I did not intend to imply that atheists were evil or did not value human life. What I am saying is that my morals are a part of my world view, based on the Bible. I find the answer to life's questions, and the meaning for my life there. I know Who made me, why I am here, and where I am going. This is all a part of my faith in God. It is all a part of my belief that the Bible contains absolute truth. It has nothing to do with my believing that I am a good person or not. I know I'm not a good person. (The Bible also tells me that, very clearly, and to a point that I would prefer to deny.) I am saying that I value human life because God made it. He gives life, and he can take it - no one else. Science, ethics, politics, finance,..... etc - they are all woven together in life, and the "glasses" through which I view them all is the Bible. You also have a world view, by which you make your decisions - your value system. It will influence your view of everything in life, from science to whatever.


    "I just wanted to say that this is not scientifically correct and not the experience that I have, as a scientist, working with endangered species, populations and ecological communities out in the field. I am not some boffin in a lab mixing brightly coloured liquids together. I am out there in the bush formulating and implementing rehabilitation plans, counting and collecting (with the appropriate licenses of course) making sure these species are preserved for posterity (as dead samples in a herbarium) because they are on the brink of extinction. I hope so much that I don't see it (extinction) in my lifetime, but unfortunately I fear I will. "

    I said that one "kind" of animals (say, reptiles) has never evolved into another "kind" (say, birds.) You say that you have a different experience? I'd like to see or hear of a proven example. I believe that God created a number of genetically diverse creatures in the beginning, each according to it's kind. These creatures "evolved" if you will, into the wide variety of individual creatures we have today, each suited to it's environment - something like the billions of people in the world today, all with their own features and characteristics, each came from the original two created humans. This happened over a matter of thousands of years, not millions.

    "Also, I think you are all well aware now that I hold Darwin and his wako theory very close to my heart and soul. How would you feel if I said: "Believing in God (or insert you chosen spiritual being here) just seems crazy." And please know that I am posing this question (how would you feel?) in an effort to evoke some sensitivity and compassion, seeing as this is in the general religion section and not in the Christianity section. I would NEVER actually say that to anyone about what they believe."

    I'm sorry that you are feeling attacked by some of the comments in the thread, Epacris. It certainly isn't my intention to attack you.
    Last edited by Cricket; May 11th, 2010 at 12:28 AM.

  4. #4
    Registered User

    Aug 2007
    Sydney
    1,691

    Hi Cricket, thanks for your detailed response.

    I mostly have a problem with what you have written here:

    To return to the evolution thing briefly - development and speciallization within a species is evident. I'm not denying that. However, when these things happen, information is LOST. New information is not created. Diversity was possible within the genetic code of the creature, and due to environmental circumstances, individual animals with certain traits had the advantage over others, and so that trait became dominant, and the other genetic information was lost over time, or preserved in another variety of that species, living in different circumstances. I believe this is sometimes called micro-evolution. Macro-evolution, in which fish become birds, for example, and new genetic information is created, is an entirely different thing, and that is what evolution is based on. I do not believe this ever happened.
    This may be what you believe but it is not scientifically correct. New genetic information is created all the time in all sorts of different ways but mostly though recombination via sexual reproduction and mutation. Also, scientifically one species doesn’t turn into another one, they evolve from a common ancestor. As a scientist, I think you are misrepresenting science to describe it as you have. If you want to believe that that’s what happens, that’s fine, but I wanted to correct the record for science.

    Of course I am not going to be able to show you the formation of a new species but I suspect that even if I could, you won’t believe it anyway, because you’re just not ever going to, that’s just not who you are. The scientific evidence that I have studied and see in the field is more than enough "proof" for me.

    I'm sorry that you are feeling attacked by some of the comments in the thread, Epacris. It certainly isn't my intention to attack you.
    No, no, not all, I am sorry if I have given that impression (surely I didn’t ). But I was hurt by a careless choice of words. It is a very short shuffle from saying "what you believe in is crazy" to "you are crazy" and I know I most certainly am not.

  5. #5

    Nov 2007
    Earth
    4,434

    I found it! This was started as a question thread about certain beliefs of JW's, so feel free to put any questions in there, no matter how dumb you think they might be (they're not dumb!), and we can have a good 'ole discussion