I took Parker and Josiah to the Baltimore aquarium yesterday. If you live in the area you need to check it out. A-mazing!
I never cease to marvel at God's creativity. I'm looking at some of these multi-colored fish and frogs and saying, "God, you rock!" You can't help but laugh at some of the fish because they are so funky. And you can't help gasp at some of the fish because of the spectacular coloring.
Can I share something?
I don't want to overstep my intellectual boundaries, but I have no idea how someone can visit a place like the Baltimore aquarium (or my recent trip to the Galapagos) and not believe in an Intelligent Designer or Creative Designer.
I think we falsely assume that Darwin himself was an evolutionist in the godless sense of the word. Not true. He credited God with creation. I find no contradiction in giving God credit for evolution. I don't want to open a can of worms here, but of course things evolve. That is the way God designed the universal software. Do I believe we evolved from apes? Nope. Scripture says that God created Adam from the dust of the earth. But I marvel at evolution as a feature of creation! I think we've created a false dichotomy. Instead of fearing the e-word we ought to celebrate God's creativity in the form of evolution. And I mean that in the most straight-forward way possible. Our adapatibility is an amazing testament to God's ingenuity.
In The Origin of the Species, Darwin says:
Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of higher animals, directly follows. There is granduer in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Didn't mean to go off on a tangent :)
I never cease to marvel at God's creativity. I'm looking at some of these multi-colored fish and frogs and saying, "God, you rock!" You can't help but laugh at some of the fish because they are so funky. And you can't help gasp at some of the fish because of the spectacular coloring.
Can I share something?
I don't want to overstep my intellectual boundaries, but I have no idea how someone can visit a place like the Baltimore aquarium (or my recent trip to the Galapagos) and not believe in an Intelligent Designer or Creative Designer.
I think we falsely assume that Darwin himself was an evolutionist in the godless sense of the word. Not true. He credited God with creation. I find no contradiction in giving God credit for evolution. I don't want to open a can of worms here, but of course things evolve. That is the way God designed the universal software. Do I believe we evolved from apes? Nope. Scripture says that God created Adam from the dust of the earth. But I marvel at evolution as a feature of creation! I think we've created a false dichotomy. Instead of fearing the e-word we ought to celebrate God's creativity in the form of evolution. And I mean that in the most straight-forward way possible. Our adapatibility is an amazing testament to God's ingenuity.
In The Origin of the Species, Darwin says:
Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of higher animals, directly follows. There is granduer in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Didn't mean to go off on a tangent :)
20 Comments:
I'm with you. Being the son of a veterinarian (a believer, I might add), I was raised on this.
Enjoy reading your blog and have a link to it from mine.
I am 100% behind you on this one Pastor Mark. I am glad that I am not the only person who sees things that way. It would be hard to imagine a world where people and animals didn't evolve to adapt to their change environment.
Hey Mark -
Love the blog. Love it.
Honest question so I can understand where you're coming from better - are you proposing theistic evolution on a macro level?
Thanks for the opportunity ask! :)
As a believer I think we get too worked up over trivial things. If you look at the order of creation God may have very well started with a single cell and said, "that's good... what if we did this?" And from there continued to do this throughout the process of animal development. Those of us who believe the biblical account of creation know that after all the animals were created, that God took pause and created man from the dust of the ground seperate from that process. I grew up hearing about the missing link in evolution. I remember hearing if the missing link were to be found it may very well help solidify the theory of evolution. Well I always looked at it from the angle that God was the missing link, or gap between man and animal in the chain of evolution. To believe in evolution would not destroy a believers faith. In fact it may very well support the story of creation.
Love it Brad. God is the missing link!
Mark
Jonathan,
Fair question but I'm not really proposing anything. Just an observation. I certainly resonate with Brad's comment.
My macro observation is that we shouldn't be afraid of science :) It is possible to be intellectual and spiritual simultaneously.
Here is what I know for sure. It takes more faith to believe in evolution by random chance than creation by intelligent design.
My two cents,
Mark
Mark, I am an Assemblies Of God pastor in Toccoa, Georgia www.gladtidingsonline.com I would be interested in asking a few questions by email if you would allow me. thanks, David Braxton davidbraxton@alltel.net
Hey David, A/G here too :)
Agree with you on the aquarium! My wife and I love that place and were there just the other day. Gotta admit, though, that we were hoping for a little more from the Australia exhibit. Such a huge glass building for such a short walk-through.
I loved that you posted on this. We are smack dab in the middle of a huge series on this very topic right now at our MW Seminar. I agree with you on the "evolution-in-harmony-with-creation" thought. Though I would make the distinction between "micro-evolution" (genetic change WITHIN species) as opposed to "macro-evolution" (genetic change BETWEEN species). The former doesn't challenge the Genesis account, the latter definitely does, supporting Darwin's statement in TOS that "the notion that each species has been independently created is erroneous."
That has massive implications for us philosophically rather than scientifically. Not only that, it (macro-evolution) is genetically impossible. Michael Behe's contributions to this end are worth the read if you haven't seen them.
Lane,
Love Behe's stuff. Also Nature's Destiny by Michael Denton was a good read. And, of course, Brian McLaren's second book in the trilogy, The Story we Find Ourselves In, is a fascinating angle.
Good distinction between micro/macro.
Mark
I read a book a while ago on Creation (title was Genesis Today if anyones interested, quite an old book, cant remember the author, sorry!), and the author made the same point...
"What is more amazing? A God who made everything from nothing, or a God who made everything make itself?" (my paraphrase!)
I'm still not sure where I stand on this issue to be honest, but I have definately not closed out this possibility!
Also, keep your eyes open for an upcoming TIME issue this Fall. Our own resident DCtonian, Dr. Francis Collins, director of the National Human Genome Research Institute at NIH in Bethesda, will be featured. As a Christian scientist (i.e. a scientist who follows Christ... important to clarify!) he takes on the famous evolutionist, Richard Dawkins in a debate tomorrow in NY at the TIME/Warner building. The transcript will come out in one of their upcoming issues here soon. I'm interested in hearing his angle. He just published a new book, "The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence For Belief," but I haven't read it yet.
There is a difference between micro-evolution and macro-evolution. I think, Mark, you're talking about micro-evolution. But when you start to move into macro-evolution, as Brad's comment does, then I certainly cannot join you in saying I "resonate" with that.
Tim
10,708 days
Really enjoying the dialogue.
I know that semantics are so important when you post on a "hot topic" like this.
Healthy discussion :)
Mark
I've been all over the place with this one. My background is biological engineering, so I really wrestled with this. Micro-evolution happens all the time. It's observable and reproducible. On the issue of macro-evolution/creation, I am somewhere in the middle of the literal creationists extreme and the macro-evolution extreme.
One thing I know, the church does not have a great track record on scientific issues. :) They have a habit of excommunicating and burning scientists who were right. But at the risk of following that dangerous lead...
Here's one theological issue with macro-evolution: Death is the catalyst for evolution. Because evolution is based on survival and adaptability, death is a necessary variable in the evolution process. So, if we embrace theistic evolution (which I don't think is what you are proposing), does that mean that God used death in order to create? And if so, did death pre-date the Fall in the Garden of Eden? If so, that could carry significant theological implications. There are ways to work around that, but I won't keep opening up the worm cans.
This is a fun discussion!
As a new Christian, I have struggled with this one. I am about to write a blog on it myself. I was happy to find this site. My sister actually showed it to me.
Brilliant blog. There is a book I'm reading called "What Believers Don't Have To Believe-The Non-Essentials of the Christian Faith." Within this book, it tackles the idea of creationism/evolution as well as other topics such as "What Does Inspired Mean (in reference to the Bible). It's such a great read by Craig Payne. He's an indie author but you might be able to find the book somewhere.
I'd recommend "Can a Smart Person Believe in God" by Michael Guillen while we're at it :)
Mark
Heather... you're right that death is a significant issue we have to deal with if we try and harmonize macro-evolution (M.E.) with creationism. But even more important is HOW death is to take place in that system. According to natural selection, it's survival of the fittest. In order for the dominant genetic traits to advance, the weaker ones have to be eliminated. The entirety of M.E. is based on a system of competition and self-focused survival. Weaker species are to be killed off. Only the strong survive.
This is what I meant in my first comment that there are major philosophical issues in trying to accept M.E. as a God-ordained method of life-advancement. It would be hard to accept Jesus' teachings on self-sacrifice for others and defending the case of the poor and sick if God's method of life advancement was one built on killing these types off. Our sin-sick society is already cut-throat enough with competitive, climb-the-ladder attitudes that we don't need to give it justification by allowing them to claim that it is just nature's model of progression.
In my opinion, death didn't happen before the fall. I think the first death was when God killed an animal and used its skin to cover up Adam and Eve's nakedness in the garden. It doesn't take a theologian to see the connection to Jesus' death covering our nakedness/sin. That's why I find it impossible to believe in any kind of theistic macro-evolution...
Post a Comment
<< Home