Jesus Dinosaurs and more!

[Aibou]

Jesus Dinosaurs and more!

Well, I was confused about Dinosaurs, Ice age and other mysteries.. and stumbled upon this site... wow! I don't know if there are any more sites like these, but it got me to study it for a few hours.. Definately recommended

[Technomancer]

oohh..what a kettle of fish this can be. At the risk of stirring the pot, I'll say a few generalities.

I'll be blunt, after reading the page it's clear that the authors have very little understanding of the science involved, and quite happily present a bogus strawman argument about evolution. If you want to learn about evolution, geology or astronomy I'd suggest reading books that discuss the real science, not the nonsense written by that site's authors. You need to understand what the real arguments are, not someone else's bad misrepresentation of them. Only then can you come to an informed decision (it doesn't hurt to have a solid grounding in physics or chemistry either).

If you want to read about evolution from a Christian point of view I'd very definately recommend "Finding Darwin's God" by Kenneth Miller. Also, Stephen Jay Gould's "Rocks of Ages" (not specifically Christian, he spends a lot of time developing a neo-orthodox view of things).

From my own perspective, there is no conflict whatsoever between the scientific view of the development of life on Earth and the Bible.

Just one quick comment. It is worth noting that the man who developed the original big bang theory was a Catholic priest (Father Georges LeMaitre, a Jesuit and MIT trained physicist). As well, neither St. Augustine of Hippo nor St. Thomas Aquinas ever saw the need to take the Genesis story literally. If you want to discuss this in greater depth, I'd be happy to oblige.

[Master Kenzo]

Wow, the site is excellent, Aibou. Thanks for the link, I was having a bit of trouble with that stuff as well. God Bless.

[Technomancer]

Just for some balance on this issue this site pretty much answers the authors objections

http://www.talkorigins.org/

[Rashiir]

I believe theistic evolution, but I don't understand how dinosaurs fit into all of this...I mean God just decided to make these really really big animals and then said "Nahh..." and threw a big snowball at Earth?

[Technomancer]

You assume that it had to have a purpose.

[Master Kenzo]

Keyword with all this stuff is the word "theory," meaning it hasn't been proven. Scientists havn't been able to prove the Big Bang (in fact, I was watching a science show the other day when they said the big bang theory had to be "revised"), evolution, or that there is no God.

Now, as Christians, we know to the contrary. We know that God created the earth in 7 days (really, 6, 7th was a day of rest) according to the very thourough(sp?) account of Genesis. We know that He exists, through personal experience. And I think that that is much better than a theory.

theory - An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.

Please don't turn this into a war. If you've got a problem, PM me.

[Technomancer]

The trouble is you confuse popular definitions with scientific ones. A scientific theory is something that tries to explain known observations about the world through a coherent framework. Evolution in this sense is both a fact and a theory. We know that species change, appear and disappear; this is amply demonstrated in the geological record. It has also been observed in nature and in the laboratory. However, the theory part of evolution tries to describe the mechanisms that govern how species change and why. Findings that would be consistent with a young Earth however simply aren't there. Straightforward observational science in astronomy, geology, etc falsify the idea that the Earth is very young.

You also assert that evolution hasn't been proven by science. This is true, but science isn't in the business of proving things, instead progress is made by disproving them. A scientific theory doesn't just explain the facts, it makes predictions that can be put to the test. For example, in the 19th century electromagnetic waves were thought by some to propagate through some kind of ether. However, as any physics textbook will tell you, this theory was falsified by the Michelson-Morley experiment, and the theory had to be abandoned. When Einstein developed his theory of relativity, it too made predictions, and these predicitons have since been tested thoroughly. The other aspect of a theory is that it is open to revision. If new facts emerge that throw doubt on parts of the theory, you have to figure out where you went wrong and change it. If the evidence completely contradicts your understanding, then you probably have to start from scratch.

I'll continue some more in another post...

[Technomancer]

To continue: You state that as Christians we know that the Earth was created in 7 days. This is wrong. Firstly, you are taking your interpretation of Genesis, and declaring it to be the only acceptable Christian interpretation. As I've stated, the historical church did not consider a literalist interpretation to be necessary here. Moreover, neither do most mainstream denominations.

You also equate evolution/big bang with atheism. This is also wrong. I've already provided two examples where this is false (Fr. LeMaitre, and Kenneth Miller). I could easily dig up more; certain papal encyclicals spring immediately to mind for example. It is perfectly straightforward to be a Christian and to accept modern scientific theory. Look, the ancient Hebrews were originally a semi-nomadic people living in a pre-scientific age. God spoke to them in terms they could readily grasp, he didn't talk about singularities, or amino acids or even write out any hard integrals. He told them what was important about creation; the rest could be figured out later.

[Rashiir]

Obviously the important part in the Genesis account is that God did it.

[Straylight]

A good place to debate this is at theologyweb.com's biology forums. There are some very very knowledgable people who hang around there.

From the short time I spend around that particular part of the website, I developed my own opinion (merely a speculation), one which fits in well with Genesis, and scientific evidence. I like to call it "old earth creationism". Here's a short explanation

At the Big Bang, God had absolute control over everything... every atom... every particle. This meant that there was no chaotic or random behaviour when the universe exploded into being. It unfolded exactly as God had planned. Every chemical reaction had been calculated. This eventually concluded in the first life appearing (seemingly by "chance"), and the evolution chain (another thing planned by God). Diving deeper into speculation, the seven days of creation described in Genesis could have been the time God spent planning and designing the universe beforehand.

[Technomancer]

Hmm, my own view is that such continual tinkering is unnecessary. All that was necessary was to decree a universe with certain physical laws. These being the basic laws of physics that decide say, how stellar fusion works or why carbon should so readily form long, complex chains. Starting from those laws, life doesn't need any tinkering with to get started, it becomes inevitable. (For example, the Urey-Miller experiment, and subsequent models)

Ps not a bad site, runs really slowly for me though. Christianforum also has a good debate area. I'll probably stick with books though (reading Gould's "Wonderful Life" at the moment).

[Master Kenzo]

One question: What is wrong with believing the Bible?

First lets assume a random person believes Genesis is a myth and evolution really happened. So first, this random guy are saying that the Genesis account is false, and is therefore throwing the whole credibility of the Bible into question!

Then he attacks Shadrach, Meshach, and Abendigo and their trip through the furnace as myth, as well as Jonah being swallowed by the whale!

Soon it would move onto the plagues of Egypt (in Exodus), and David vs. Goliath. Then eventually, he starts attacking the virgin birth of Jesus, and then His resurrection.

Soon, the Bible would be all myth, and that random person no longer believes in God but is now an atheist who believes in evolution.

This has happened to many believers, folks, in many ways. All I'm saying is, take the Bible for what it says. Do you think God would lie to us? No! That's against His nature!

So just think about it, and if you doubt the Genesis account of the Bible, take a look at some Creationalist sites.

But after all, dissecting the creation of the universe is trivial compared to the truth of the Gospel, so I really don't think it's good to be wasting time arguing about this.

I won't be posting on this thread anymore.

[Rashiir]

I don't think it's a myth at all...I just don't think it's meant to be interpreted literally...

[blue elf]

I will add my 2 cents to this I suppose. I believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis. I went to a Christian school and I still go to church there. They've always preached a literal interpretation and it is my belief that evolution is false. Ok, that's my 2 cents so moving on....
BlueElf

[uc pseudonym]

Man, this is a huge issue. Some years ago, I was pretty interested in the whole subject, and read a good bit of material on the matter. (Though I couldn't find a book supporting evolution that wasn't either old or basically a strawman argument. Technomancer, can you help me out here?) Today, I generally try to stay out of it.

First lets assume a random person believes Genesis is a myth and evolution really happened. So first, this random guy are saying that the Genesis account is false, and is therefore throwing the whole credibility of the Bible into question!

Then he attacks Shadrach, Meshach, and Abendigo and their trip through the furnace as myth, as well as Jonah being swallowed by the whale!

Soon it would move onto the plagues of Egypt (in Exodus), and David vs. Goliath. Then eventually, he starts attacking the virgin birth of Jesus, and then His resurrection.

I see what you're saying. But there's one tiny problem. The Bible is not a single book. It's full of a variety of different things, by different authors from different times. Looking over the entire Bible with one view would be a bad idea. The Psalms are a bunch of songs, Proverbs is basically sayings. They aren't chronicles of history. Some scholars say there's evidence that Esther is actually a play (I haven't really looked into this issue, I have no opinion). But even if it was, that in no way means that the rest of the Bible is too.

What I'd like to end on, though, is that this debate is, in some respects, pointless. Our faith is not dependant on any given theory or thought about how the universe was created. Regardless of what you believe the Bible says about the beginning or end of the universe, it's really supposed to be about now.

[Technomancer]

For a reading list (off the top of my head):

Explaining Evolution:
Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species. Darwin's original work, while old (an in many ways dated) does give an excellent description of some of the basic ideas in evolution. It's not a dense, technical book, but instead is really written so that just about any animal breeder could understand it.

Robert T. Pennonck, Tower of Babel A thorough refutation of so-called "creation science". Principally attacks "intelligent design" theories.

Ernst Mayr, What Evolution Is. This book gives an excellent survey of current thinking in evolution.

Carl Zimmer, At the Water's Edge. Discusses current ideas regarding the first appearance of land animals, and later of whales. Excellent discussion of the paleontology and transitional fossils.

Carl Zimmer, Evolution, the Triumph of An Idea. I've been meaning to read this but haven't got around to it yet. Most people tell me it's an excellent survey of the theory and evidence of evolution. This book is the companion to the PBS series that aired recently, so is specifically geared to the broader population.

You could also look for undergraduate biology texts (I have heard that the high school texts are irritatingly politicized). An introductory text on evolutionary biology would be especially useful (I don't know the good ones, but I could ask my brother who's a Ph.D student in biology).

Kenneth Miller, Finding Darwin's God. The first half of the book is largely an explanation of evolution and a refutation of some creationist misconceptions. The second half is about seeking common ground between Genesis and Christianity. The author himself is a professor of biology and a practicing Catholic. I highly recommned this book.

I also strongly recommend the talk.origins website that I posted earlier.

To be continued..

[Technomancer]

Christopher Wills and Jeffrey Bada. The Spark of Life. A very good overview of the both history and current theories regarding abiogenesis (the chemical origins of life). Helpful if you have some high school chemistry and biology.

Stephen Jay Gould. Rocks of Ages. A good book discussing the common ground of science and religion from a foremost paleontologist. Primarily written from a neo-orthodox perspective (if you don't know what this means, I also suggest reading some of Ian Barbour's stuff, although it's not necessary to understand Gould's work).

Putnam's Geology. An excellent introductory text on geology. Absolutely essential in understanding Earth history.

You should also be able to find some popular material on astronomy/cosmology. Invaluable for understanding stuff like the Big Bang.

Stephen Levy, Artificial Life. Doesn't really discuss natural evolution per se, but gives a good overview of a fascinating area in computer science related to this debate. Basically the book discusses self-organization, genetic algorithms and genetic programs.

Pope John Paul II Fides et Ratio. "Faith and Reason" Not directly about evolution, but discusses the essential dialogue between the two. That is, faith and its relationship to science and philosophy; an excellent read.

David Attenborough's stuff (Blue Planet, Trials of Life, etc). These are just really cool. Good discussions of how animals function in their ecosystems. Doesn't directly deal with evolution, but the theory is vividly shown "in practice". That and some beautiful photograhy.

There are other books that I know, but they all come from the point of view of immediately accepting evolution, and going from there. I admit, I don't find the evolution/creation debate especially stimulating given that from my perspective, the scientific issues were settled ages ago in favour of evolution. I am usually more interested in the actual science that's being done now.

[Technomancer]

I will add one addendum: I was raised Catholic, and sent to Catholic schools. Neither my parents, my teachers (some of whom were truly excellent), nor our parish priests saw any need to take Genesis literally. I'm sure you could also find a great many protestant thinkers who would agree on this matter. (McGrath I know is one, as is the fellow who wrote "The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind")

[uc pseudonym]

That's cool. I'll get around to reading some of that, I have time this summer. Actually, I understand what evolution is really saying just fine. I'll have to read The Spark of Life, as abiogenesis is one of the issues I have greater interest in. Thanks.

[Keely]

http://www.creationevidence.org/ - has lots of good information about "young-earth" creationists and theories. I have actually been to this museum and have seen some pretty amazing experiments that they have been doing there. It's really very interesting. I agree with *most* of what they think happened, but really, as interesting as it is, it doesn't really affect my faith all that much if there were dinos on the ark or not, or if the earth is 4,000 or 4 million years old. Still, it's cool to think about.