The theory of evolution.

Post Reply New Topic

I mean....the theologians have "offered" us a solution in the face of the virtual fact of evolution:

God CREATED the mechanism which underlies evolution. Evolution proceeded from there.

There you have it: Your Creation, and our Evolution!

Kills two birds with one stone, so to speak.

The problem with that is how it deals with the development of human beings. The idea is the first human came into existence fully evolved as such. Some would say even more evolved than we are now considering having a nearly thousand year lifespan. So I'm wondering how the Pope would deal with the Adam and Eve issue.

That's really the main objection I think from the Judeo-Christian-Islamic believers. The theory of evolution as it pertains to human beings, which means "we are just an advanced breed of monkeys" as Stephen Hawking put it, rather than created in the image of God.

Last edited by EzraS on 22 Jun 2017, 8:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I don't know about Francis---but I believe Pope John Paul II thought of the Adam and Eve story as being an allegory, something symbolic, and which was placed in the Bible as an illustration of how "faulty" man really is. That Man gives in too much to Temptation. That Man must aspire to as much perfection as possible.

I'm not sure about that because there's a whole genealogy and history attached to Adam. And still what it comes down to is we evolved from apes. I know some Christians try to have their cake and eat it too when it comes down to creation and evolution and I think they can, except for when it comes to the origin of mankind.

Most of it is symbolic. There is some history in it---but it was written by the standards of the day, which weren't stringent as ours as far as "historical accuracy" is concerned.

Most theologians don't believe the Bible is to be interpreted totally literally. It's part fable, part chronology, part saga, part morality play, part literature, part biography, and many things I can't think of at the moment. It's a great anthology, really.

So what if we evolved from apes? Apes aren't bad creatures. We didn't evolve from "apes," literally. But from an ape-like ancestor.

It's better than if we evolved from gremlins.

It defies the Judeo-Christian-Islamic belief that we are set apart from all else created in the image of God with an eternal soul. And that is the main reason why they reject the theory of evolution.

Yep....that's the reason.

But...many Judeo-Christian theologians have jumped on the evolution bandwagon. I don't know about Islam. But there is a relatively "rationalist" side to Islam, too. It's not all 75 virgins. jihad, and things like that with Islam.

Well I'd be interested in their take on human evolution. According to evolution were are no more significant than any other breed of animal who stared out as primordial ooze.

But we are significant...we have evolved! We have work to do to become better and more evolved.

All living beings, to a greater or lesser extent, have evolved from the "primordial ooze."

You should undertake a study of the Bible.

And of works on evolution starting with Charles Darwin.

And read up on Mendelian heredity, too. Especially about mutations.

Mutations lead to bad things sometimes....but they also lead to evolution.

Evolution has been directly observed. Pesticides have to be modified because insects become resistant to them. The pesticides in use 20 years from now won't be the same as those used now. The "theory" in evolution refers to how it occurs, not whether or not it occurs.

All possible metaphors aside such as talking snakes, it's perfectly clear the bible depicts man starting off as an advanced homosapien rather than evolving from a series of lower life forms. I'd be interested in Bill's take on it as well.

How old do you believe the Earth is? I believe it is about 4.6 billion years old.

From a scientific standpoint that's its estimated age.

From a couple of creationist theories I know of, there's the gap theory that when genesis took place the earth already existed but was a void wasteland, perhaps through a catastrophe, and from there god reformed it. Which would take into account the fossil record. So there's earth part one and then there's earth part two where genesis picks up.

The other is just as god created man as a fully developed adult, rather than starting him out as a fetus, god also created a fully developed earth. So even though Adam was only a day old he had the attributes of a person who formed over a period of lets say 21 years. Likewise even though the earth was a day old, it had the attributes of however long it would take the earth to develop to that point.

^ Here's an excellent book on the history and philosophy of science that you might like to add to your reading list: Toulmin & Goodfield's The Discovery of Time.

https://books.google.com/books?id=h_Tb8B8Uo5gC

It reviews the development of the historical picture of the universe that we have today, as that picture developed over the last 2000 years through religion, philosophy, and science. It's very well written also -- a minor masterpiece in the history of science.

If taken literally, the Biblical Creation Story doesn't make sense.
Then again, the belief in it is arrived at, usually, via "faith," rather than relatively objective inquiry.

I must say, though, that the Abrahamic religions have had great staying power. Could there be some basis to them?

I, myself, don't believe there is literal basis--but perhaps an allegorical basis.