Why do people assume that it has to be creation OR evolution?
Why can't it be that God used evolution to create? It is just that we have finally gotten to a level that we can start to understand some of the "how" God did what God did...or at least we can start to comprehend the tools God has used.
I've always wondered this, too.
Logically, there is no reason "God" wouldn't have the ability to create and then allow evolution to improve upon certain designs, so to speak.
Looking at the history of mankind (and animals, and the Earth), there are definite signs of evolution. And yet, there are several instances where mankind took huge, inexplicable leaps in development.
There can be no other logical explanation... evolution AND creation.
Though there are many other thoughts about the existence of life but the majority of the people believe in either creation by god or evolution. People love to see evidence since our mind is relentlessly seek proof to believe in any kind of ideology/belief system.Unless we see and hold some create evidence mind does not get peace. That's is the reason why most of us try to assume creation of evolution behind the existence of life in this world.
What a beautiful question! it could ultimately be neither or both!
It occurs to me that one of the true wonders of our universe is the way in which it ponders itself. I think it does so in more ways than we could possibly imagine.
It is a wonder in itself that we are given the opportunity to take an active role in the marvel that is existence, even though far too often it goes totally unrecognized.
Peace and love to All
One theory is that, first, there is no "God" -- AND life arose and evolved naturally. That included apes and hominids. BUT, ancient aliens hundreds of thousands of years ago arrived and created humans by genetic engineering. They combined their genes and ape or hominid genes to create humans. They called their first successful experiments "the Adam". And the aliens were known as "gods" (little "g"). Texts much older than the Hebrew Old Testament record this. And what truth there happens to be in the Bible derives from the old texts and legends. (There are even some slips in the Bible where it actually references the plural gods, not the singular "God".)
See the mention in my profile page of Zecharia Sitchin's books about the Annunaki. He is just one of several researchers on the subject.
Or perhaps evolution reached a point where what evolved was able to create.. Do we not now strive to create an artificial intelligence - computers and robots who look and act like people? We are making synthetic skin and organs..Creating new forms of life in our image? Perhaps that is how it works. "God" evolves and part of the process is to create new life forms.
It seems logical that thought forms would exist before physical forms, just as you picture a birdhouse before you build it. So what we refer to as "God" is really the original evolution of thought forms, or the source of "creation" which becomes refined and expressed through evolution. The seemingly abrupt leaps in evolution could be realised to be a product of feedback from the physical world stimulating the Thought form (God) that it is time to move on to the next step.
A brief comment on how thoughts could evolve before matter... We see from experiments with chaos theory, etc.. that a seemingly disodered system will actually develop and express patterns. Imagine the initial state of the univere as a chaos of energy waves, radiation, etc.. these waves in colliding with each other form patterns, bounce back and interact with each other, gradually increassing the complexity of absorptions and reflections, forming fractal patterns, etc.. awareness of itself only being relative to our understanding once enough patterns had formed out of the chaos to distinguish parts of it from other parts.
I find this to work well to describe what we percieve as "The big Bang" I do not necesarily think that there was "nothing" before it. I percieve the "Beginning" to be represented as a process rather than an event, but if it needs to be held under a microsocpe for observation we would see it as the moment when either the homogenous primordial "EnergyMass" was seperated into Energy and Mass. Still equivalent but now seperate. The seperation then grew in compexity as the "black and white, yin and yang", entwined themselves together in increasing speed and variety. Alternatively picture that the 2 were initially seperate and then whatever membrane kept them apart was shattered.
Good question. I was taught in Sunday school that evolution was the way God created the world. Darwin's theory of evolution is not incompatible with Christianity. Many Christians accept Darwin's theory.
Here's ALL that Evolution says.
Evolution (which I firmly believe - it is used on a daily basis and explains so much, AND has stood the test of time, AND has survived a ~100+ year direct assault) DOES NOT DISPROVE GOD.
All that it says is that, through natural laws - i.e. physics, chemistry - organisms spread their genetic material from one generation to the next. And if a specific member of that organism/species is able to survive AND reproduce then their genetic material will be passed on to a new generation.
That's ALL that it says. Restated, it says that every living thing today has a 'father' or 'mother' or 'other-parent-like-object' before it.
Of course, this statement has PROFOUND consequences, but one of the consequences is NOT that God, or gods, or deities or magical entities, or a flying spaghetti monster, do (does) not exist.
You could take this to mean that the natural laws were created by God with fore-knowledge that He knew how life would turn out; or that the physical laws have just always existed, the same way that any God could have just always existed; or you could say any number of other things.
But it is inaccurate to say 'evolution disproves God' - god is by definition unprovable, and thus un-disprovable. That's why the religions require Faith.
Anyone who claims otherwise might have a commanding understanding of evolution, but they are taking it about 55 steps too far.
If you want to discuss the ORIGINS of life, let's discuss Abiogenesis, Religion, or philosophy --- NOT EVOLUTION.
This is the only true answer anyone can give you.
I have done some research on this topic. It is interesting that all over the world ancient mythology holds pretty much the same: that humans were created by aliens, or reptiles (snakes, dragons), or aliens that looked like reptiles. North American Indians share this mythology just like Australian aboriginals, Chinese, and some ancient European mythology.
Evolution is taking place, but its not Darwinian evolution. God created one breeding pair in each species and/or family group, with many latent variations in their genetics, and through natural selection, these genetic variations are being separated, giving the illusion of de novo evolution. Therefore we should see more genetic variability the further in the past we go, and less genetic variability in the future, which is exactly what we see.
"If you look back 500 million years ago, early history of invertebrates, there was an enormous range of designs which we no longer see on the Earth. Designs which we don't even know how how to relate to any existing groups, *because any pattern in the history of life it's not progressive advancement of complexity. It's rather the restriction of these enormously varied designs that existed early in the history of life to a few highly successful forms*." Gould
There is also a highly sophisticated environmentally induced adaptation mechanism that produces temporary changes to the physical appearance (phenotype) but makes no changes at all to the genetics (genotype), the cecal valves of lizards are a prime example. This is referred to as phynotypic plasticisty
"Lizards Undergo Rapid Evolution After Introduction To A New Home" Sciencedaily
Date: April 18, 2008
University Of Massachusetts, Amherst
Summary: In 1971, biologists moved five adult pairs of Italian wall lizards from their home island of Pod Kopiste, in the South Adriatic Sea, to the neighboring island of Pod Mrcaru. Now researchers have shown that introducing these small, green-backed lizards, Podarcis sicula, to a new environment caused them to undergo rapid and large-scale evolutionary changes
But as we see, the lizards DNA sequences did not change, thus no Darwinian evolution took place, because Darwinian evolution can only be established by DNA sequence changes
"Our results suggest that in P. sicula, at least some of the changes associated with a dietary shift toward a higher proportion of plant material MAY BE PLASTIC. Specimens from the Pod Mrcaru population, which in nature? eat substantial amounts of plant material exhibited a reduction in digestive tract length AND A TOTAL LOSS OF CECAL VALVES AFTER BEING FED AN EXCLUSIVELY ARTHROPOD DIET FOR 15 WK" - Bart Vervust
The theory of Darwinian evolution was established long before we knew anything about phynotypic plasticisty and "conserved" (do not evolve) DNA elements.
by Athlyn Green 4 years ago
Creation or evolution?Did man get here by being created or did he evolve?
by smalika 7 years ago
The paleontologists have found no evidence of the existence of the intermediate creatures that are claimed by Darwin to have existed for the conversion of one animal species to another..
by Zubair Ahmed 4 years ago
Why do people assume the worst of you the moment you mention religion on the Hub forums?There is no compulsion in religion so when we are having a debate on secular and religious topics why does it wind up the atheists. If you don't believe in religion then don't waste your time commenting on...
by ctnahda 5 years ago
Do you personally agree with Darwin's theory of Evolution?
by toobsucker 7 years ago
Darwinian evolution (atheistic evolution) requires 100% of all biological systems to be subject to the mechanisms proposed for evolutionary change, yet the conserved elements are not subject to any of the evolutionary mechanisms. A theory that predicts 100% system change must demonstrate 100% of...
by Nomascus concolor 3 years ago
Is the Darwin's theory of evolution really against what is in the Bible?Is there room for interpretation regarding Adam and Eve and the creation of the world or is it very literal to you?
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|