Few questions have the ability to polarize opinion as much as the debate on whether creation and evolution coexist. The passionate fervor with which people defend their views on the topic is, in a disturbing number of cases, inversely proportional to their level of knowledge on either one, or both, subjects. Creationists wave the Book of Genesis while evolutionists quote Darwin, both sides behaving as if the argument began and ended with the publication of those two sources.
It seems as if both camps use the argument to beat each other up. If either side would stop casting smug looks long enough to listen to what the other had to say, they would realize they have more in common than they think. The truth is that the two ideologies need not be mutually exclusive.
If atheists can convince us all that the existence of evolution discredits the story of creation, then it is a simple step to cast doubt on the existence of God Himself. Put evolution together with the Big Bang and there you have it. Who needs a Creator?
Creationists, on the other hand, fear that if they recognize evolution as being plausible, then they are turning their backs on God. This is simply not true. Creationists don't understand evolution and evolution don't understand creation. A major sticking point is the actual date of creation, and how the timings of the Big Bang and Adam's birth don't work out. They are overthinking this.
There is no reason why pro-creationists should demonize all of science for the sake of one area in which they disagree. Where are their protests when their doctor is prescribing medication, or when they use a cell phone. Those are scientific inventions. All scientists are not atheists.
Darwin's book, 'On the Origin of Species', was published in 1859, a century and a half ago. Since then, a wealth of evidence has been revealed in support of new species emerging by natural selection. Evolution does not say that men came from the apes. What evolution by natural selection does say is that organisms develop new traits that enable them to survive in new environments.
At the reductionist level, every cell contains DNA. DNA holds the code to the sequences of all the proteins in every living cell on earth. Proteins can either be enzymes, catalyzing biochemical reactions, structural proteins maintaining the integrity of the cell or DNA regulatory proteins, helping to determine which proteins get manufactured in which cell at which time.
Here is an example that is easy to understand. Vitamin D is produced by a biochemical reaction involving cells in the skin interacting with solar energy. While Vitamin D is essential for survival, too much is toxic. Over the millennia, humans living near the equator, where the sun is strongest, have evolved the ability to manufacture enough melanin, a pigment in the skin that blocks the sun's rays, to make sure that just enough Vitamin D, and not too much, is made. The fact that this, and the millions of other biochemical reactions, is so finely tuned to perfection suggests that it did not happen by accident, but by design. There is every reason to believe that creation and evolution coexist.
It seems as if both camps use the argument to beat each other up. If either side would stop casting smug looks long enough to listen to what the other had to say, they would realize they have more in common than they think. The truth is that the two ideologies need not be mutually exclusive.
If atheists can convince us all that the existence of evolution discredits the story of creation, then it is a simple step to cast doubt on the existence of God Himself. Put evolution together with the Big Bang and there you have it. Who needs a Creator?
Creationists, on the other hand, fear that if they recognize evolution as being plausible, then they are turning their backs on God. This is simply not true. Creationists don't understand evolution and evolution don't understand creation. A major sticking point is the actual date of creation, and how the timings of the Big Bang and Adam's birth don't work out. They are overthinking this.
There is no reason why pro-creationists should demonize all of science for the sake of one area in which they disagree. Where are their protests when their doctor is prescribing medication, or when they use a cell phone. Those are scientific inventions. All scientists are not atheists.
Darwin's book, 'On the Origin of Species', was published in 1859, a century and a half ago. Since then, a wealth of evidence has been revealed in support of new species emerging by natural selection. Evolution does not say that men came from the apes. What evolution by natural selection does say is that organisms develop new traits that enable them to survive in new environments.
At the reductionist level, every cell contains DNA. DNA holds the code to the sequences of all the proteins in every living cell on earth. Proteins can either be enzymes, catalyzing biochemical reactions, structural proteins maintaining the integrity of the cell or DNA regulatory proteins, helping to determine which proteins get manufactured in which cell at which time.
Here is an example that is easy to understand. Vitamin D is produced by a biochemical reaction involving cells in the skin interacting with solar energy. While Vitamin D is essential for survival, too much is toxic. Over the millennia, humans living near the equator, where the sun is strongest, have evolved the ability to manufacture enough melanin, a pigment in the skin that blocks the sun's rays, to make sure that just enough Vitamin D, and not too much, is made. The fact that this, and the millions of other biochemical reactions, is so finely tuned to perfection suggests that it did not happen by accident, but by design. There is every reason to believe that creation and evolution coexist.
About the Author:
When searching for a way to let creation and evolution coexist you can find more information at www.lifeandcreation.org. See additional details at http://www.lifeandcreation.org now.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire