Evolution or Religion?

1. 72

   LaWandaDeniseposted 11 years ago

   Evolution or Religion?

   replyreport
2. 83

   Attikosposted 11 years ago

   Why are the two mutually exclusive? Is there really no third choice? Can't it be both?

   replyreport
3. 0

   Larry Wallposted 11 years ago

   In my opinion they can. I contend, and I may be a minority of one, that evolution is the plan designed by God to governed the development of creationism. In other words, when God created the universe, he laid out a road map for the future and we named that road map evolution.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      lone77starposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Larry, you can make it "two." And I suspect that there are far more who agree.

      replyreport
4. 72

   stanwshuraposted 11 years ago

   My visceral response is evolution.  However, an answer truer to my feelings/conclusions on the comparison is more nuanced.    Where religion gets extremist and militantly rebukes natural selection in favor of some magical "things are because that's how He designed it/"the way they're supposed to be", I either ignore it or fume in disgust.  Similarly, when your rock-rigid scientists (and those so oriented) hear the word "rellgion" and shut their ears off and go "la la laa...I can't HEEEEEAR yoooou!!", before considering any logical or phenomenal way in which the two can co-exist, their credibility wrt considering ALL data and/or analyses takes quite the hit as well.  So, the "this or that" format of the question is itself something with which I have a bit of a problem.

   replyreport
5. 73

   lone77starposted 11 years ago

   Both!
   
   Many (all?) biblical literalists interpret the timeline in Genesis to give us a very young age to Earth. These Young Earth Creationists feel that the universe and Earth are between 6000 and 12000 years old. But that's only one interpretation of the Bible.
   
   Science gives us a far older universe and Earth. Though science is not right on everything all of the time, they are right so much of the time that we have to consider their input.
   
   If the Bible is right, it would match reality. Science studies reality and has done an excellent job of it. Just look at our technological society. To ignore reality is to court delusion. Therefore, if the Bible does not seem to match science, then it is possible that either science is wrong or that the interpretation of the Bible is wrong. Notice, I said that "interpretation" is wrong, not the Bible.
   
   In science's favor is the fact that so many different sources within science give us an old universe. It seems more likely that the one interpretation would be wrong when stacked against hundreds (thousands?) of scientific observations.
   
   The biblical literalist thinks their interpretation is right, but in the search for truth, humility is required. Holding onto one's own interpretation can be the antithesis of humility.
   
   I have found a different interpretation of Genesis that yields a biblical timeline compatible with those of science. In fact, it explains a lot of the apparent enigmas found in Genesis like,
   * The seemingly outrageous longevity of the early patriarchs.
   * The fact that the addition of all those years comes up far short of the reality found by science.
   * The reason why God gave seemingly unjustified protection of a murderer and a liar (Cain and later, his descendant Lamech).
   * The identity of the elusive "daughters of men" found in Genesis 6.
   * The reason behind the Great Flood of Noah.
   * The existence of the Kabbalists' "Tree of Life" matrix embedded in 2 chapters of Genesis.
   
   What is startling about this new timeline is that it gives an age of humanity far older than the current minimum age found by scientists. In other words, they have many more bones to discover before they get the true age of humanity. But that new biblical age of humans seems to show that, though everything else evolved slowly, Homo sapiens may well have been created or engineered in an epoch when giants roamed the Earth

   replyreport
6. 0

   JThomp42posted 11 years ago

   Both and "Salvation".................................................

   replyreport
7. 76

   calynbanaposted 11 years ago

   This is not an either or choice. They can go hand in hand.

   replyreport