Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While I realize this whole endeavor is unlikely to get any response, I would recommend "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins for an understanding of the modern Theory of Evolution.
The Origin of the Species is somewhat limited in that it was written before we had an understanding of genetics and at a time when we had less fossil evidence.
I haven't read this, but judgeing from the people who responded to your post I can only assume it is not so much a book on modern evolution, but one designed to disprove it, and I have read a few of those and they where as filled with half truths. and a half truth is a whole lie. however if you wish to learn of modern synthisis I would suggest lawarnce Moran
I'll admit I haven't read all 12 pages of this discussion. (Who has the time?) So if this has already been brought up, my apologies. Anyway, here goes...
I am neither a scientist nor a trained theologian, but what little I know of both leads me to believe that evolution is right there in Genesis.
Only three times did God create ex nihilo, speaking what Genesis gives as the word bara' in Hebrew/Aramaic. Bara' roughly means "create" or "be" as I understand it. Those three times were for the creation of matter (Genesis 1:1), the creation of life (Genesis 1:21), and the spirit of man (Gensis 1:27).
Throughout the rest of the creation account in Genesis, it says God "brought forth" or "formed" (depending on the translation you're reading). As in "Let the waters bring forth..." or "let the earth bring forth..."
So only three times did God create from nothing. Throughout the rest of the Genesis account, God is making or creating from pre-existing matter. How? I don't know. Genesis doesn't tell us because Genesis is not a science book. Genesis is not giving us the intricate details of how God created. It is telling us why God created.
We can't use Genesis to explain how God created any more than the scientist can use the fossil record to explain why.
I also have not read all the thread but I like your answer and I share your opinion.
I also think that how God has created the world and us does not change my belief in Hor on the fact that He loves his Creation.
I do not feel threatened by the theory of evolution, in fact I find it a wonderful and amazing miracle.
I haven't read this, but judgeing from the people who responded to your post I can only assume it is not so much a book on modern evolution, but one designed to disprove it,
Wow, talk about jumping to conclusions.
Looking back at the last couple posts, I haven't the slightest idea where you came up with that particular assumption.
Quote:
I would suggest lawarnce Moran
I am familiar with Lawrence Moran, as well as Talk.Origins in general.
Considering that Moran's blog has a link to (Author of The Blind Watchmaker)Richard Dawkins' site under the category "Rationalism" I don't think you could be farther from the truth.
oops, i was up late finishing a project scanning alot of materiel
i guess my multitasking got out of hand. imo though I don't believe we have made any real progress since darwin proposed natural selection. I have read a few things on it, and untill we can create life in a lab i dont see how we will. I have noticed alot of people think it means we (all life) sprang from a one single cell, in one enviorment, (temp, salinity, etc) I don;t see how this is necasarely the case
oops, i was up late finishing a project scanning alot of materiel
i guess my multitasking got out of hand. imo though I don't believe we have made any real progress since darwin proposed natural selection. I have read a few things on it, and untill we can create life in a lab i dont see how we will. I have noticed alot of people think it means we (all life) sprang from a one single cell, in one enviorment, (temp, salinity, etc) I don;t see how this is necasarely the case
Steffan.... define life... is 99% of a cell life? Is 99.9% of a cell life? 1%? 2%? As far as the progress made since Darwin propose his theory (wasn't natural selection by the way) we've come a tremendously long way. I also don't understand what creating life in a lab has to do with evolution itself? However, if you'd like to see where that side of it is heading then here you go:
when we create life in a lab we will have a better understanding of how it happened in nature. define life? propegate, resperate, etc and yes FFS darwin did propose natural selection. read the book. since then all we have is, might have happened, could have happened and probaly happened, no concrete evidence
when we create life in a lab we will have a better understanding of how it happened in nature. define life? propegate, resperate, etc and yes FFS darwin did propose natural selection. read the book. since then all we have is, might have happened, could have happened and probaly happened, no concrete evidence
Sorry, you are correct, Darwin did coin "natural selection". What the heck was I thinking???
probaly reading to many evolution books written by people wobbeling on the shoulder of a true visionary genius
Ha! No, there were a lot of things that Darwin didn't know about, so it interests me to read more about not only evolution, but the advances made that support his platform.
it is fasinating to read some of the theories, but so many seem to focus on defending evolution where it needs no defence
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.