Whooa, Lucy. This was an example I found of the kind of wrong thinking about
evolution that I am hoping that good church teaching could correct! Sorry
for the confusion.
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
Behalf Of Lucy Masters
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 6:20 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: What Evolution Means
Shuan wrote:
Let's discuss just what evolution would mean if it were true. If evolution
were true then there would be absolutely no point to life except to
reproduce. We are merely links on a chain. We are the highest and most
advanced form that evolution has taken, but eventually we'll be regarded as
pond scum. We are insignificant individuals on an insignificant planet in an
insignificant solar system in an insignificant galaxy in an insignificant
universe. What we do today will hold little or no significance for future
generations and there are no consequences for our actions. You believe that
there is no God or if there is a God he did a crappy job creating the
universe and then just kicked back after he finished his "half-ass job" and
let nature do it itself (which according to theistic evolutionists did a
much better job than God did).
Lucy responds:
Shuan, I cannot imagine how you arrived at these conclusions and wonder if
you heard them from a pastor in a fundamentalist church? Good heavens...it
appears you are saying that a "work in progress" is necessarily inferior.
What evolution "means" to me is God is simply not quite finished with us
yet. And why should He be? Why on earth would we deny God the ability to
take His time making us into the perfect creatures He desires? I have many
purposes in life (and only one child). I have never felt insignificant.
Also, you seem to have the idea that God created everything EXCEPT nature;
that is, you seem to believe that when "nature" is working God has no part
in the process. There's a point of logic missing here. Just think about
it. If God created everything, then God created nature, and evolution, and
gravity, and so on.
Shuan wrote:
In fact it is not technically a science at all. Common descent can not be
directly observed so it must be believed in faith. This makes it a religion.
Lucy responds:
No, Shuan. We also didn't see all the volcanic eruptions that created
landmasses all over the planet, but our belief in those geologic facts does
not make geology a religion. There is plenty of scientific evidence to
support both evolution and the geologic creation of land masses. They are
sciences because of the **way** that information is known (measurement,
empiricism, etc.).
Shuan wrote:
Numerous times contradictions and nonsense occur in evolution.
Lucy responds:
Yes...and contradictions and nonsense occur in medical science, too, over
the ages. But a science it remains, and our steady improvement in medical
science does not make older practitioners quacks - they did the best they
could with the knowledge at hand. Importantly, you should note that a huge
percentage of our "improved knowledge" is *ALL* of the sciences has a strong
foundation in prior facts. Rarely do we throw out entire ideas and replace
them with something new. We add to existing knowledge. Such is the case
with evolution and medicine.
Shuan wrote:
If you believe in evolution, you believe that nothing came from nowhere to
create the big bang. Inanimate material self-organized into a complex
universe. Electricity struck ozone to create inanimate organic material
which in turn self-organized within a chaotic environment to create
proteins. These inanimate objects also self-organized and turned from
non-living to living. These single celled creatures who were incapable of
thought, through personification, willingly changed their genetic structure.
Through a fluke two fragile sexes were developed (which is de-evolution
because it makes reproduction much more fragile, unlikely, and difficult)
which both survived and thrived. After this, cells began to group together
to form multi-cellular animals which, in turn, mutated their own dna and
after a series of impossible circumstances became life as we know it.
Lucy responds:
Wow! Where did you study biology? I have **got** to meet your teacher
and take him out for a stiff whiskey (just brought back some great stuff
from Scotland). Single celled creatures *willingly* changed their genetic
structure???? How do those little guys do that? Please tell me immediately
because I desperately want to look like Kim Bassinger and will *will* myself
right away! Shuan - you speak as though the inanimate becoming the animate
is crazy thinking (even though we are composed of all sorts of inanimate
stuff like hydrogen and oxygen and carbon), but you don't think God waving a
magic wand to create the universe out of nothing in seven days is a bit
daft. Where is your logic?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 07 2002 - 17:19:03 EDT