Featured Scholar Explains Why So Many Reject Genesis

You are correct. I have taken graduate courses in the sciences.
It was a poor choice of naming though as they found out later.

Even today the scientific world still can't define it or "dark energy".

However, I still remain somewhat skeptical seeing the many times the theories of "origins" of life and matter (of any kind) have changed from time to time.

HankD

 

Just a couple of points

1. That is one aspect of science that I appreciated, by its very nature, it is always (most) to learn, adjust and refine theories and postulates
2. In essence "evolution" itself, does not postulate the "origin of life" rather the processes by which we see the diversity of life.

Often scientists of the naturalism "flavor" (atheist/agnostic) seek to create models and theories which require no god or supernatural force. But there are multitudes of theistic and christian scientists who go on about their science unbothered by such.

 

There are many who go beyond biologic evolution to include all that exists, postulating the eternity of energy/matter and/or the Laws of Science.

 

I know and understand that, particularly naturalistic cosmologists

 

We need to separate motive from action.

The motive, it seems, of the literal interpretation of Genesis people is the idea that unless they defend it, God's Word becomes a lie and to be disbelieved. At least, that is the motive they seem to ascribe to those not taking Genesis as being written literally.

Of course, many of us literally believe what Genesis literally says, which isn't at all what the YEC literalists tell us it says.

Do some evolutionists veer off into eugenics, abortion, etc? Absolutely and that is misusing it. But others make your annual flu vaccine. Should we abstain from taking it because it was based on genetic study (aka evolution?)

I get so tired of the antievolutionist telling me Darwin says we came from monkeys (he did not), that all evolutionists deny Genesis (not all do), or any of this other silly rhetoric.

A fourth grader today knows what the odds are of getting a wrinkled pea if you breed a wrinkled pea with a smooth pea. Now, taking that genetic study and continuing it down the line many generations is what evolution is.

So I am left with asking what is the motive of both groups?

For some of the evolutionists, I would say the motive is some is simply to find the truth. For others it is a doomed attempt to refute the Bible.

And for the anti crowd? Some are trying to preserve the Word (albeit IMHO doing a bad job of it). Some seem to be terribly afraid that if evolution proves true, then Jesus and the miracles are not real. And some just plain seem afraid of modern life, modern science, and modern reality.

So here is my stand: please stop saying that if I do not hold with YEC I "deny Genesis." I don't. Let me repeat: I DO NOT. I simply deny YOUR particular interpretation of it.

I am sick of watching the circle get continually smaller as the more rabid fundamentalists keep redefining the faith once delivered to the saints. I'm sick of watching young people who really are saved being convinced they are unbelievers because they just cannot accept the false science of the YEC crowd. I'm sick of us making buffoons out of ourselves fighting battles that do not need to be fought and wasting time, energy and manpower that should be used to win the lost to Christ.

There is no conflict between God's truth as recorded in the Word and God's truth as recorded in the world. None. Zip. God is not a liar. He has no need to make a young world appear old just to test our trust in Him. That would make Him guilty of deceiving us.

No, we need to understand God gave us a marvelous universe AND marvelous brains to understand it.

Sometimes we misunderstand His Word. Sometimes we misunderstand His world.

But He never, ever, in either record lies to us. So while our pea brains may not yet see it, they agree.

There IS NO argument between true science and true faith.

 

Odd that the OP griped about me not replying to his posts, and has summarily ignored mine.

 

Study of the flu virus may indicate micro evolution but just where is it written that genetics has anything to do with macro evolution which is the topic of discussion here?

 

nodak

I responded to one of your misconceptions above. Before responding further I would like to know your concept of evolution. I see that you are tired and sick but do you believe man is the outcome of an evolutionary process from a lower species.

 

OR,

Duh.....DNA is the source of information transmission for all life. It is what drives evolution. That evolution exists as a fact is undeniable. DNA is what makes the changes. Now the question is.....what is behind the genetic changes.....that is where ones faith or lack thereof comes into play.

 

:applause::applause::applause:
Kudos Nodak on a wonderfully articulate and intellectually honest post.

 

More accurately, some are trying to preserve the truth of the Word. I reject evolutionary theory because of the biblical record. I see nothing in the Genesis narrative that lends itself to evolution. On the contrary, I see creation -- immediate and supernatural -- based on the expressed will of God.

 

Duh ......That evolution exist as a fact is not undeniable. Micro evolution may occur but to use nodak's example a pea is still PEA. It is not a fact that evolution has or can change one species into another.

I fully understand that DNA is information. I also understand that the Second Law of Thermodynamics applies to information transmission. You might want to check up on that

 

Nodak

Frankly regardless of the accolades of quantum faith much of the above post is simply a rant. I posted the following passage of Scripture either on this thread. Given the context in which it is written, one of the Ten Commandmants, it confirms a six, 24 hr. day creation.

Exodus 20:1-11
8. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10. But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

You did say one thing that is true, God does not lie! You can believe it or not.

 

I suspect that it may be yourself who does not completely understand the concept of entropy.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo/probability.html

 

I have no problem conceding that I do not fully understand the Second Law but do you understand what caused genetic defects?

I do understand that violation of the Second Law has never been demonstrated and that macro evolution is a pipe smokers dream.

 

Overall an excellent post Aaron. I believe the most significant statement you made is that regarding Darwin's finches and quoted above. Generalizing your statement I would say: "Genetic information is lost it is never gained." That is what the Second Law tells us about information! That is the reason I asked quantumfaith

 

Aaron,

You did good.

Well written, and presented.