From Dinosaurs to Birds

hi christy

you said:

" All adaptations are driven by changes in environment, not by sitting in a closed room with earth-like conditions. "-

yes. i actually talk about something else. i talk about a giant room in the size of the galaxy or even the universe. so in this condition its possible (according to the atheist view)that a bacteria that in the room can evolve into a human that will make a car, so its indeed a car that evolve in a close (giant)room .

" I don’t argue that there is no Designer. I am pretty sure that you can’t scientifically prove there is a Designer, but I don’t care, because I believe the Bible is revelation from God."-

the bible actually says: "“וידעת היום והשבות אל לבבך כי השם הוא האלוקים בשמים ממעל ועל ה ארץ מתחת” (דברים ד’, פסוק לט’

in hebrew its mean that god want us to know that he exist in the sky and in the earth. so its very important point. if it was just a belief, then we can belief in anything we want. so it actually more then just a belief.

by the way christy, there is a lot of problems with evolution from a scientific prespective. you can check it for yourself with those great articles from creation.com:

i know that some of them are very important for both christians and non christians believers

yours sincerely.

As a former “creation science” speaker/debater in my Young Earth Creationist years of long ago, I find it fascinating how so much of the same pseudo-science from 1962 (The Genesis Flood) is still being used today. (As Ripley used to say, “Believe it or not!”)

That page is a great index of failed arguments. I’m saving that URL because that particular webpage can be very useful. I might even consider placing it in my autobiography under “More Reasons Why I’m an Ex-YEC”.

My favorites are where they deplore uniformitarian science and then use illogical uniformitarian arguments to claim the earth is young!

I strongly encourage readers to check out that Creation.com treasury of “creation science”. (It is not a parody.)

hi prof tertius. what is the argument\evidence that changed your mind about evolution? do you still believe in god but also in evolution?

@dcscccc

“In the Beginning God created the heavens and earth.” In the Beginning God created Time. Time = Change. No Change, that is if every day were the same, no Time. Right.

Not only did God create Time, which is Good, God created the universe within the framework of Time, that is 6 divine days, instead of all at once. Thus God created in an evolutionary manner, step by step within time rather than in an atemporal revolutionary manner. Am I correct?

All this is revealed in Genesis 1, but we also have God’s revelation in John 1 and in other parts of the Bible which give a little different view of how God works in time. We also have the witness which God left in the rocks of geological time.

What I am trying to do and BioLogos is trying to do is put all these witnesses to the Glory of God together to come up with a more coherent understanding of the majesty of God as God rules the earth and the heavens and you and me.

There are always going to be theological and scientific questions that need to be worked out, which is why we have theology and science. That is also why we have BioLogos, so you are welcome to work with us to this end.

I’m a retired ordained minister and seminary professor. I certainly still believe in God and my study of evolution played an important role in revitalizing my faith!

I was part of the “creation science” movement in the 1960’s and 1970’s. [I tell various aspects of my story on my blog at https://bibleandscienceforum.wordpress.com/] I was excited by Morris & Whitcomb’s The Genesis Flood and basically had it memorized for use in lectures and public debates. Yet, after a while I got very concerned about “facts” that didn’t check out. For a while I accepted the excuse that “sometimes people exaggerate in the excitement of this kind of ministry” but over time I became more and more troubled. Those days were long before the Internet so it was not easy to find helpful information. However, when I accepted a lecturer appointment at a major university, the much larger library provided virtually every science journal imaginable. I started looking up the citations I had been using and I was aghast at the number of deceptive quote-mines and “creative” uses of ellipsis. (Frankly, it sent me into a depression.) I won’t take the time here to explain all that I went through–though you can find such information on my blog–but eventually I simply couldn’t continue repeating arguments, quotations, and pseudo-science that I realized were untrue. I even finally got to the point where I asked one of my famous colleagues, “If all this is true, why do we have to rely on deceptive quote-mines and misleading half-truths?” The answer basically told me everything the Holy Spirit had already convicted me about.

During that same period of my life I was working hard to bring my Hebrew skills up to the level of my Koine Greek background and with it a great deal more comparative and historical linguistics. My study of Hebrew lexicography and exegesis greatly changed my understanding of the early chapters of Genesis. I realized that so much of my background in terms of *origins theology" in a Young Earth Creationist church was more tradition than Biblical text. I also began to realize just how recent in the history of the church was YECism, “creation science”, and “flood geology.” (As you probably already know, the “creation science” which The Genesis Flood introduced to mainstream evangelicals was Seventh Day Adventist concepts published by George McCready Price who claimed to have based it on the prophecies of Ellen White. Of course, I didn’t know of that history at the time because the book said nothing to credit Price or Prophetess White. Dr. Whitcomb didn’t mention that background until years later. By the way, perhaps you saw Dr. Whitcomb honored at the “plank pegging ceremony” for Ken Ham’s Ark Park. Ken Ham credited him for starting the “creation science” movement. That designation is quite appropriate.)

At that point in life my greatest knowledge deficit was in evolutionary biology and biochemistry. So it was time for me to see how my new positions based on the Hebrew text aligned with the evidence from creation itself. And that’s when I was thrilled to see how everything fits together so beautifully. As a Young Earth Creationist, I was constantly dealing with the total contradiction between my view of Genesis and the evidence in creation itself. I always had to look up what my “creation science” heroes were saying was the explanation behind the contradiction. (My mind had always been bursting with contradictory evidence which I had to work hard to “force into the same box.”)

Thankfully, with my newfound knowledge of the scriptures and from creation, everything finally fit together! The conflict and the stress that had troubled me for all of those years—years spent trying to salvage cherished traditions that didn’t fit the Biblical text nor God’s creation around me—was gone!

It absolutely revolutionized my worship and my view of God. It was absolutely thrilling to leave behind me the “small deity” of my one-kind-at-a-time view of Special Creation. I got to know and worship the God of the Bible whose power and wisdom “engineered” the laws of physics in such a way that life would come from non-living ingredients (just as the first two chapters of Genesis states several times) and produce evolutionary processes which diversified life in the biosphere (just as Genesis states.)

It has been thrilling to learn God’s answers from both of his great works of authorship: God’s scriptures and God’s creation. Because both share the same author, I expect them to be in harmony. They are.

So I praise God that he reveals his truths in both the Bible and in his creation. I don’t have to be frustrated by conflict any more. All I see is harmony. It wasn’t necessarily easy to abandon tradition. I had to work through those cherished, man-made traditions one-by-one and see which ones held up against the Word of God and which ones didn’t. Yet, it was all worth it.

Now, in retirement, I try to help others get free of the conflicts and confusion which I lived under for so long. Also, I still feel very guilty and responsible for the audiences I misled so long ago. I was young and gullible and trusting. (I simply assumed that my “Christian heroes” did their homework, were careful about quotations and citations, and had carefully examined all of the evidence. I was wrong in all of those suppositions.) Yet God is merciful and all I can do now is try to help people recognize and praise God for the abundant answers he gives us in both his scriptures and his creation. We can trust them because they come from God himself.

One other comment may be helpful: A few years ago I was asked this question: “When you were deeply committed to creation science and all that went with it in terms of young earth views, did anything which other people told you help you decide to re-examine what you were doing?” I didn’t have an immediate answer and told them that I couldn’t think of anything. But I went home and found myself thinking about that question for several weeks. Eventually I realized something: The people who were very congenial in questioning me were easy to dismiss—but some of the people who hit me hard and tough with very difficult questions (about both the Bible and Science) were the ones who helped me most. They broke through my pride and confidence and they said things like “You are influencing a lot of young people. Are you certain you’ve checked out all the facts behind what you are saying?” and “Are you sure that all of the world’s scientists are wrong but you are qualified to school them in what they don’t undestand?” My first reaction was usually an anger that I concealed, yet those were the confrontations which got me really thinking. I truly believe it was the people who were very tough on me who God used to bring me out of the “walled ideology” I’d built around my mind and life. (A geologist by the name of Glenn Morton wrote his own account of what that was like for him when he was a “publishing creation scientists”. It is easy to find online under “Morton’s Demon”. He tells how his mind was trained to keep all evidence out. I highly recommend everyone reading it. My story is so similar to his. In his case, his oil exploration company job moved him to a different post where he had to work with the real field data of the geology. It forced him to see that “flood geology” made no sense and didn’t fit what he saw in the field.)

I should mention that during those times I also was troubled that I was seeing the beginnings of somewhat “cult-like” behaviors within the movement. I don’t want to dwell on that here but when I look at how the CS movement has changed since the 1970’s, it disturbs me greatly—and far more than back then. The trends I saw then are multiplied exponentially today. No, I don’t feel proud for getting out early in a “I told you so” sort of way. Instead, I feel very guilty because I played my own part in what has happened as the movement grew and became a big money origins industry. I often wish that my debate opponents years ago had been much harder on me and perhaps I would have started my introspection much earlier and with more vigor. Yet that would be passing the buck. No, the guilt is mine. I wasn’t just a follower. I bear responsibility as someone who misled others.

1 Like

Thank you, @Relates. I will save that for my reading list.

Hello,

I am a moderate-conservative Protestant and I accept Intelligent Design. No problem. Even some members of BioLogos accept it. I must believe in a First Cause and that was an eternal Being. I believe it was Yahweh Elohim.

I moved 20 posts to a new topic: Evolution and God’s Sovereignty (and the BioLogos view)

@Christy wrote:

When you wrote this Christy, you said that you were not a scientist and all that you knew about evolution you learned in children’s books. This statement does not appear to be from a children’s book, but that is besides the point.

Now you are part of the BioLogos team, so as such please consult with them or others to see if this understanding of evolution that you cite is more than evolution for kids, and, if it is, where it is laid out by scientists for adults.

One important issue that I do have with this statement and that is you say that the goal of the individual is to survive, and adaption is only a byproduct of survival. Not really. That is like saying that the goal in football is to win the game, and the fact that the players practice and study so they might play better is a byproduct of their desire to win.

Playing better and wining both go hand in hand. Teams must practice and work together to win. It is not an accident or even a desire.

The question is, what is the right way to survive or win? Is it to adapt by working together with other members of the species, or compete with your other members of the species as a selfish gene as Dawkins and Darwin indicate?

To win in football teams must adapt to counteract the strengths of the other team, and to make the best use of their own strengths. Individuals on the teams must adapt to their team mates so they can best work together. Winning in the short run can at times not be helpful in the long run. Individual success can get in the way of team goals.

There are clear example of individuals putting their survival in danger to protect other members of the group. This indicates that self survival is not the primary goal of individuals. This causes all sorts of problems with Darwinists, but not for ecological evolutionists, which is one reason I support the latter.

@Eddie
I read the article you cited on another blog since closed to comment. It criticized Darwinian evolution as being ahistorical. I totally agree.

I really do not know if homology is the answer, but if you look at what I have written about Dinosaurs to Birds in this blog you will find a historical non-Darwinian way to understand evolution, which I find to be very helpful.

@Christy
@Eddie

I agree with Eddie that BioLogos individually and separately need to be more specific, but I also think that Eddie needs to be also.

The astonishing fact is that there is a clear and open place in the evolution process where God can be placed and needs to be placed. In the recent (2010) book

What Darwin Got Wrong

by Jerry Fodor et al., the authors clearly and without contradiction point out that the concept of “natural selection” points to a Personal Agent, not an impersonal natural process. In fact Darwin and Co. do not even try to define how a natural process works, except for the “survival of the fittest,” as if a slogan can take the place of science.

The book even says that God though the Holy Spirit could be that Personal Agent determining natural selection, not that they believe that this is so for one second. Saying that something happens “naturally,” that is it acts in a purposeless undirected manner doe not make it so. In fact Darwin said the natural selection is directed toward the perfecting the organism, whatever that means and whoever is able to do that.

The fact is that God used natural selection based on ecology to guide evolution through the process of creating human beings and all other living beings. The evidence is all around us, which is why it is so difficult to see.

Nature is not purely physical. Genes are based on the genetic code, which is a language and not material. God could have chose to easily manipulate our DNA codes to make us who we are, but I do not think God does that.

God has created a diverse environment in our world, where advanced beings like humans have to think and love to best survive and thrive. God the Creator also sent down God the Logos/Son and God the Spirit of Love to further enrich our environment and give us guidance. We are the product of our environment which God has created in many ways, physical, rational, and spiritual. That is how God works.

The statement is not from a children’s book, the content is. I’ve learned a lot of history from teaching my kids too. It’s amazing what you don’t learn in school the first time around.

Yeah, my special power to delete spam does not get me VIP access to a special team of science consultants. But… the BioLogos website is full of information on this very topic, so you can read for yourself where it is laid out by scientists for adults: http://biologos.org/questions/what-is-evolution

I was talking about genetic adaptation over time, not some behavioral adaptation of an individual or group within one generation. Populations adapt genetically over multiple generations. Individuals don’t genetically adapt, no matter how selfish or selfless they are. It’s not a choice. I don’t disagree that communities cooperate for survival, but then we aren’t talking about genetics anymore, we’re talking about social behavior of animals.

For example, where we normally live in the mountains of Mexico, meat is scarce and dogs are fed old tortillas. Biologically, dogs are carnivores, but certain individual dogs are able to digest and get the necessary nutrients for survival from corn. Those dogs survive. The dogs that are born and can’t eat corn die as puppies. No individual dog is saying, “I want to survive. I will adapt to this situation and learn to like stale tortillas.” Even if the mama dogs want to share their tortillas with their babies, if the babies can’t digest it, they will not survive to reproduce. Either their biology can handle it or it can’t. Over many generations the dog population in that area has a much higher concentration of corn digesting dogs in it than in populations of dogs where meat is available.

1 Like

It seems to me, Eddie, that while every young earth creationist would of necessity hold to intelligent design, not every ID adherent holds to YEC. This is a distinction often lost on many others.

1 Like

Many Americans seem to think that Ken Ham is the point man for YEC. However, to be honest, I don’t know much about him. I tend to be more influenced by creation.com, an organization headquartered in Australia. I also appreciate the analysis and challenges presented by Ian Juby, a Canadian who is YEC. But Answers in Genesis and the Institute for Creation Research are other organizations who have also discovered great insights, and who make relevant arguments. I don’t need to accept every single thing they say, in order to appreciate their general arguments and discoveries. In the same way, while you have difficulty with YEC, I still appreciate the many lucid comments you make.

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.