ADN

This was a backpage editorial in our local weekly alternative paper. I thought it made an excellent point and offer it up for comment and/or critique.


In the search for knowledge and faith, boundaries are defined and sides are chosen. Quite often, pseudo-parallels are drawn and unwarranted conflicts are created. It seems as though the combatants search for the fight instead of the truth. Consider regions torn apart for centuries because of religious differences. Some Americans sit in their comfortable recliners and shake their heads at what they view as the stupidity of international religious wars.

As United States citizens, some of us judge and frown upon nations torn apart by different spiritual agendas. †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œWhy

can†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬…¾

‚¢t they just drop it and move on?†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬? some ask. †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œWha

t argument is worth hundreds of years of fighting?

With tunnel vision, many fail to detect and address the silliness of some of our own invented issues. I wonder if the world is laughing at some of our shallow excuses for conflicts. An example is creation vs. evolution. Many Americans flinch at the mere mention of the conflict. Evolution has become a buzzword in the ears of many Christians, even though comparing it to creation is like comparing apples to orange soda.

The intention of this essay is not to debate the argument. I am trying to convey that the two issues are quite different and that many people fail to see that the truth of one does not result in the falsification of the other. Both evolution and biblical creationism address different issues. Each should be considered independently.

There are major problems with the way Americans debate the subject of evolution vs. creationism. Evolutionary studies describe the mechanism by which living things change over time. Creationism asserts there is a supreme being who brought living things into existence. One side attempts to answer the question of †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œhow

†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬? living things are made and the other pursues the question of †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œwho

†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬? is responsible. The questions are quite different.

The opposing parties differ in qualifications, backgrounds and interests. Theologians and other devout followers of the Bible learn the ways of creation and of the existence of God through prayer, meditation and through hours absorbed in inspirational music, sermons and fellowship. Experts in the field of evolution labor through strenuous, thorough and structured coursework and research in the fields of biology, chemistry, genetics and physics, to name a few. Both sides approach their separate questions with different preparation and background.

Their aims are different, too. The goal of theologians, pastors and priests is to give people inspirations for persistence and perseverance during hard times by teaching faith and love, which also builds a relationship wit God. The goal of scientists is to observe what happens naturally, ask questions about said observations, collect empirical data (measurable observations), and come to conclusions on the most likely answer. In short, scientists strive to find loopholes in scientific theories (even their own) and to further investigate more probable and likely solutions.

Finally, the criteria of evidence in scientific theory differ drastically from those of faith-based creationism. In order for scientific hypotheses to become theories, and eventually scientific laws, the facts must be empirical, and m ore importantly, scientists across the world must be able to duplicate and agree with the findings. The belief in creationism is established through faith alone, and cannot be proven true or false. The faith method works for situations in which the goal is to make one feel or believe in the presence of a supreme being. Specific details have little to do with how we feel about life and how we choose to live it. Look at the specific teachings, holiday rituals and _expression of art as they apply to the different religious denominations. The details are different for everyone; universal agreement is not required (by most religions) for belief in a supreme being.

The argument of creationism vs. evolution also seems to be one-sided. Scientists are often accused of attempting to prove that God does not exist. I invite everyone to search through reputable scientific journals and find just one sentence that makes a claim against God. Or divine creation. You won†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬…¾

‚¢t find one. Regardless of scientists†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬

…¾‚¢ religious beliefs (or lack thereof), their research does not address their spiritual opinions. The scientist records and reports actual results and observations that other scientists around the world can duplicate. An excellent point to consider is that evolutionary scientists come from just about every religious and political background, including Christianity.

Remember that creationism and evolution are separate issues and not opposing viewpoints. I encourage Christians to consider the following points:
Nowhere in the Bible does it describe the mechanism of how living things were created or how they change. It does not explain how living things adapt over time, nor does it explain how species relate to each other. Therefore, do not discount scientific evidence for natural selection and evolution. The Bible does not teach you to do so.
Many are willing to send men to prison because of DNA evidence, but many of those same people oppose teaching children in public schools about the DNA evidence that shows how living things adapt over time. DNA research has offered a great amount of evidence in how evolution occurs.
Read Darwin †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬‚¢¢¢¬…¾‚

¢s †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œOri

gin of the Species†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬? before claiming to oppose it. At the very least, read it in order to know what it is that you disagree with and what it is that the little fish emblem on your car is eating. Please do not discount Darwin without knowing what he wrote about.
Remember the true purpose of the Bible and of your faith in God. We war not taught to be blind to the observations we are able to make, nor are we taught to accuse others. Do not be afraid. Scientists are not trying to empty the churches and convert the Christians. They are simply studying the world in which we live. The breakthroughs they discover may one day save your life.

A friend and colleague once said, †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œGod

survived Copernicus. He will survive Darwin .†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬?

all that stupidity about creationism ("how god created all") indeed does not do away with the fact that good and evil is found inside of us and not above and below. Our Good god exists (as does its opposite), but it is not responsible for evolution or creation. rather... it became an outcome of it - when species received the power to choose and not solely follow instincts.

and yes... i am pulling the same string over and over again.

That was an interesting article DD, but I still don't see how Creationism and Evolution is different. Both try and explain how things came to be. Evolution just tries to explain it without a Supreme Being

I thought the article was excellent, by the way DD, and really adds another perspective, that I feel I agree with almost whole heartedly...

Ahh, my friend Brains...I do not see you much in Worldwide, but here in VU you'll get my undivided attention... /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

Why do you feel creationism is stupidity..? What exactly is stupid or preposterous about intelligent design..? Or should I so, so stupid, that evolution seems like it makes THAT much more sense..? Or is that even what you're saying at all..?

QUOTE(trashtalkr)That was an interesting article DD, but I still don't see how Creationism and Evolution is different. Both try and explain how things came to be. Evolution just tries to explain it without a Supreme Being

Here in the South, TT, this is one of the BIG controversies. We've got Creationists that are trying to get it taught as a viable alternative to Evolution. This is what I've always believed coming from both a very religious background and having a deep scientific interest. I just thought this guy put it very nicely. The Bible describes the who and the why, Science describe the what and the how.

Now that I read my quote I wrote it wrong. I know how Creationism and Evolution are different but I don't see how they address different issues. Creation explains the creation of everything with a Supreme Being. Evolution explains the creation of everything without a Supreme Being

Evolutionary studies describe the mechanism by which living things change over time. Creationism asserts there is a supreme being who brought living things into existence. One side attempts to answer the question of †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œhow

†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬? living things are made and the other pursues the question of †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œwho

†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬? is responsible. The questions are quite different

I thought that drew the line fairly well, tt...You don't..?

I agree and disagree...This essay does make a good point, but is sketchy at times...However I sense the author is playing a little bit of the devil's advocate, emphasizing certain points too much to get them across...and I can appreciate that...Mainly, he seems to be supporting the rationality of evolution (which is complete BS) but not because he endorses it, but rather to encourage others to keep an open mind. I like that. I think the whole evolution vs. creation thing is just an abstract term for God vs. No-God, and the author is pointing this out throughout the essay...not an earth-shattering insight, but still a decent observation. Worth my time, thx for sharing...

QUOTE(AYHJA)Evolutionary studies describe the mechanism by which living things change over time. Creationism asserts there is a supreme being who brought living things into existence. One side attempts to answer the question of †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œhow

†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬? living things are made and the other pursues the question of †™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œwho

†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬? is responsible. The questions are quite different

I thought that drew the line fairly well, tt...You don't..?

I did read that part but I don't agree with it. Creationism and Evolution try to answer the same question: How did the world come into existence? Creationism answers it with a "who" while Evolution doesn't. But in both cases, they try and explain how everything got here

I think we have (for the most part) agreed that Creation followed by Evolution was not a prime contender for how we truly got here, right? God didn't just spark things off and watch them evolve...