Creation & Evolution: Theories that Conjoin Them
In the Bible, it says God made man. Scientists say "prove it" and propose evolution to be the answer. They point to fossil records and say "proof". Religious folks point to the bible and say "proof".
In my self-righteous opinion, I say both. My "proof".
Only a blind fool would deny the preponderance of evidence that suggests the evolution of animals. The same can be said of the evolution of man. We have fossil records of a variety of "man-like" apes. Before I tick off too many religious zealots, I ask that you consider what separates a man from an animal: intelligence.
In my reading of Genesis, the pattern of creation mimics scientific theory of the advent of the world and life upon it. Life began in the water, according to both the Bible and scientists. From then on, science and Bible agree on the timeline for the Earth, plants and animals up to the 6th day of creation. Then the big argument begins.
God created man. I can agree with that. Science and bible have agreed until this point. Some say evolution, some say creation. Why doesn't anyone look at the world as a car with God being the driver? God became bored with the whole dinosaur thing so he slammed a meteor into the planet. Not so hard to imagine when you consider the floods, plagues and other mishaps that Bible and geology/history agree with. He (She, whatever you want) guided the apes evolution and changes so that their appearance eventually mimicked His own percieved image. God created man. Evolution created man. Same thing. Then during Homo-Habilis' time, Adam (homo-habilis) decided to pick up some rocks and smack them together. Now he is separate from his more ape-like cousins. He has tasted the fobidden fruit of intelligence. His body continues to change over eons looking more and more like the image of God and his compounded intelligence outshines the more unGod-like ancestors. God pushes the ancestors into extinction as He becomes bored with- perhaps even offended by- their presence. Either that, or their lesser intelligence just becomes too inferior to compete with the newer, sleeker, smarter man, and they fall naturally into extinction.
So, have I convinced you that both can be true? Perhaps I have convinced myself that homo-sapien will fall into oblivion in favor of homo-post-hominem.
posted by SuperDad @ 8:17 AM
9 comments:
Not ticked off, just conversing, okay?
Your theory's not a new one, I used to think the same thing myself. The problem is the legendary 'missing link', but what evolutionists don't like to talk about is the fact that its not one broken link in a sturdy chain, its more like hundreds of thousands of broken links in a pile, NONE of them connected. Are you aware that of all the fossils ever found, some millions of years old, not one has ever demostrated a halfway point between two different species. They show species adapting and changing, but never transforming into other species. Elephant-like critters remain elephant-like critters, there was no half-elephant, half-some earlier species.
Just a friendly challenge, Dailybrane, what is thine response?
Don't have a good response. My post wasn't supposed to be an "answer". I don't claim to know anything about it.
I suppose that half-species wouldn't be on the planet very long. Probably very briefly. Specialists survive a lot better than dual-use creatures (like lungfish, sure they exist, but there's a whole lot more success with normal gilled fish.).
"Young Earth Theorists" believe the planet is only 6,000 years old. I suppose it's possible, but I have trouble with it. You mention fossils "millions of years old" which violates some creationist views- not all, but some.
I think that may be one of the reasons that Creationism is sometimes scoffed at (I don't, honestly). Different takes on the same subject.
I have done a bit of research on this subject, and I don't even remotely claim any real knowledge. In Job 40:15-24, they refer to a creature that sounds a lot like a brontasaurus/apatosaurus. It seems odd that biblical time people would have knowledge of a creature that's assumed to have been extinct by the time man walked the earth.
Yup, good point. Maybe God told em or something....
Anyhoo... I disagree with the young Earth theory strongly. They get 6000 by adding all the geneologies in the pentatuch together. You know, "Habamalithamech lived 236 years and beget Shammmallahlakamasseh then lived another 319 years and died." Oh, and a literal 6 days for creation. I take the Bible very literally, but not stupidly literally. There's evidence that the word "day" was interchangeable with "epoch", and as far as the geneologies go, some gaps may occur by the way they used the word "Father", a great-great-great-great-great-Grandfather is your 'Father'.
The reason I take the creation story literally, and am not as open-minded about it as I used to be, is that I'm convinced science is inadvertantly proving it while vainly searching for disproof. It just seems to me that the bulk of fossil evidence is saying that, at different times in the development of our planet, certain species burst into being, then eventually died of extinction or still exist. Again, they may radically adapt to their environment over time, but they structurally and genetically remain the same species.
I'm not commenting on this anymore, Brian, I'm getting too stimulated... ask me about my house.
how's your house?
Um..briandaily suggests that you blog every day
I would, but my house flooded. I'm living in a motel for a few days. Thanks, though.
wha?? what happened?
So what...waterbed mattress leaked, water heater went bonkers, what? Or were you kidding?
And about the evolution versus creation thing. I have always wondered...when the first family was exiled and went to live east of Eden, there is mention of other people (Abel married one.) Were they created or evolved?
I meant Cain, not Abel...dang it. Someone needs to correct me.
Post a Comment
<< Home