|
Yanniru, evolution is based on natural selection [essentially non-random death] selecting mutations [presumably random] to accumulate a successive degree of ordered biological complexity over time. For the sake of discussion, we will ignore the weaknesses inherent in this theory and concentrate on the difficulties it poses for sustaining a belief that the Torah/Bible is the inspired Word of God.
The concept of sin in biblical terms [both in the Torah and the Bible as a whole] is introduced in Gen 3. Death came as a result of sin. So in your view, if I understand it properly, the creation of man was brought about by sin. God hates sin, so he would have used a machanism he hates, to bring about a significant portion of His Creation.
In my view, the creation prior to sin [Gen. 3], held no death. Death in a sense, occurs when a body succombs to the laws of entropy, which embrace all of creation. By entropy I mean, not entropy in the classical themodynamic sense, but rather in the fact that nature favors chaos over order and that systems invariably tend toward a state of equilibrium. If what I believe is true, then death as a spiritual concept, is manifest as entropy in nature.
Also, if this is true, we could look for and find, evidence that instead of evolving, the human genome would be subject to decay. There are almost an innumerable amount of genetically-born maladies present in the current human genome. Also, there has been a steady-decline in the age of menarche [age at which a woman begins the menstrual cycle—at one time it was high as 20 current avg about 11 or 12] exhibited over the past 200 yrs or so; the latter can be interpreted as evidence that we are aging faster.
Yanniru, I am dogmatic [with reason] reagarding who the "authority" is in terms of what is true. Rather than compromising the Bible with science, if science says something that contradicts the Bible, science is simply wrong. There are several reasons for this; one is, that there is a limit to what we can know. As a consequence evidence will be interpreted according to one’s philosophical pre-supposition ie, God or no-god. Who says their pre-supposition is better than mine?
Another reason is based on religious philosophy; that is, as soon as one begins to delete or ignore portions of the Bible [I feel strongly it is meant to interpreted as a whole] one opens the door to what I refer to as "smorgasboard theology". Where one could concievably build any form of religious doctorine around a select passage. For example, one could say that Christ stood for cannabalism when He said "take, this is my body and eat.." There is nothing new about this, the most notable recent example being David Koresh and the Branch Davidians of Waco fame. I consider the fact I don’t understand his theology a blessing from God Himself.
Brian
|
