No, this controversy will never end, because it is a battle between people who have very strong convictions about what they believe.
Creationists cannot accept the theory of evolution because to do so would contradict the Bible. Some Christians have tried to make compromising theories, such as theistic evolution, which proposes the idea that God used the process of evolution.
This theory is unacceptable to fundamental Christians, who believe that the Biblical account of creation in the book of Genesis is meant to be taken literally.
Another theory similar to theistic evolution is the gap theory. Those who promote this compromise say that they believe in the Biblical record as is, but they believe that there was a gap of an unknown number of years, possibly several million years, between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
Proponents of this theory believe that they are keeping the “scientifically proven” facts of evolution intact, such as the age of the Earth and the rest of the universe, dinosaurs, fossils, ice cores, ice ages, and geological formations; while allowing a literal belief in the Biblical account.
Neither of these compromise theories is actually true to the Biblical record. They only address the question of how God created the world. The Bible goes on to say that there was no death in the Garden of Eden. This includes animals.
Before the fall of man, God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground – everything that has the breath of life in it – I give every green plant for food.” (Genesis 1:29-30)
Theistic evolution and the gap theory, as well as a theory that the days of Genesis don’t necessary stand for 24 hour days – all include the death of creatures.
In order for fossils to have formed and for carnivorous animals to eat, there had to have been death. But the Bible record shows that both man and animals ate only vegetation until at least after the fall of man.
The first time that God is recorded as saying that animals could be eaten if after the flood. In Geneses 9 God told Noah, “Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.” (Genesis 9:3)
There is nothing said about people or animals being carnivorous or omnivorous
between the fall and the flood, although it does mention that some people kept animals. For example, Adam’s son Abel kept sheep and he offered a lamb to God.
Evolutionists cannot accept the Biblical account of creation because to do so they would have to accept the God of the Bible.
Thomas Woodward, in “Doubts about Darwin” quotes New York Times science writer James Glanz, “Supporters of Darwin see intelligent design as more insidious than creationism, especially given that many of its advocates have mainstream scientific credentials, which creationists often lack.”
Dr. Eugenie Scott (executive director of the National Center for Science Education and a leading critic of young earth creationism) has said “The most striking thing about the intelligent design folks is their potential to really make anti-evolutionism intellectually respectable.”
So we have two sides – Creationists and Evolutionists – that are not likely to agree on how we got here, at least not in this life. There are compromising theories in both camps, but the purists at both ends of the spectrum are far from meeting in the middle.
Thomas Woodward, in “Doubts about Darwin” quotes New York Times science writer James Glanz, “Supporters of Darwin see intelligent design as more insidious than creationism, especially given that many of its advocates have mainstream scientific credentials, which creationists often lack.”
Dr. Eugenie Scott (executive director of the National Center for Science Education and a leading critic of young earth creationism) has said “The most striking thing about the intelligent design folks is their potential to really make anti-evolutionism intellectually respectable.”
So we have two sides – Creationists and Evolutionists – that are not likely to agree on how we got here, at least not in this life. There are compromising theories in both camps, but the purists at both ends of the spectrum are far from meeting in the middle.
Intelligent design is a relatively new theory which is a compromise by scientific minds that look at the fossil record and the complexity of the earth’s plants and animals and conclude that this complexity must be the work of an intelligent designer.
Nor should we make any attempts to meet in the middle with those who insist on using some ancient book to support a view on how we came to be. The Bible is no more valid than any other work of fiction in explaining our origins.
No comments:
Post a Comment