Even before works, does Evolution enable more: if it is a partial Evolution?

[Gottservant]

Hi there,

So I have a curious thought: instead of arguing with Evolutionists, maybe we could come together and agree that certain things are true - in relation to Evolution?

I was thinking of surrendering that Evolution is better served by works, and that we should offer to do them: but in the process I came to the conclusion that Evolution itself would do better, if both selection pressure and readiness were respectively less and as able - I will explain what I mean.

Say there is a selection pressure of predation for a given species - let's say the horse. When that horse encounters this threat, speed is needed [to escape] and those that develop that trait will escape the predator - let's say a dinosaur - and those that do not develop enough speed will be caught and killed. The premise I want to make clear, is that simply developing speed on its own will not free the horse from the dinosaur: actually it is a specific range of speeds that will work.

The point being that aiming at the greatest possible speed, takes time that horses do not have - in essence it is a Nash equilibrium, to develop near to the necessary speed, but not necessarily the maximum (that would be 'Trivial Evolution').

So Evolution facilitates best, when it is not taken as law - in other words - or that if it is: it is only partially (partial Evolution).

I think my logic is sound, but I put it to you to reply!

 

[☦Marius☦]

Hi there,

So I have a curious thought: instead of arguing with Evolutionists, maybe we could come together and agree that certain things are true - in relation to Evolution?

I was thinking of surrendering that Evolution is better served by works, and that we should offer to do them: but in the process I came to the conclusion that Evolution itself would do better, if both selection pressure and readiness were respectively less and as able - I will explain what I mean.

Say there is a selection pressure of predation for a given species - let's say the horse. When that horse encounters this threat, speed is needed [to escape] and those that develop that trait will escape the predator - let's say a dinosaur - and those that do not develop enough speed will be caught and killed. The premise I want to make clear, is that simply developing speed on its own will not free the horse from the dinosaur: actually it is a specific range of speeds that will work.

The point being that aiming at the greatest possible speed, takes time that horses do not have - in essence it is a Nash equilibrium, to develop near to the necessary speed, but not necessarily the maximum (that would be 'Trivial Evolution').

So Evolution facilitates best, when it is not taken as law - in other words - or that if it is: it is only partially (partial Evolution).

I think my logic is sound, but I put it to you to reply!

There are plenty of churches who either have no official position on evolution, or accept it. To be honest most of the people I know who are so paranoid about accepting it are southern evangelicals.

A few articles on the Orthodox perspective of this topic.
Can an Orthodox Christian accept evolution?
Orthodoxy & Evolution

And my favorite:
RE: Article on Orthodoxy and Creationism.

 

[God bless Joshua]

If life developed from evolution we will be a bunch of tumor.

 

[Mike Czaj]

Hi there,

So I have a curious thought: instead of arguing with Evolutionists, maybe we could come together and agree that certain things are true - in relation to Evolution?

I was thinking of surrendering that Evolution is better served by works, and that we should offer to do them: but in the process I came to the conclusion that Evolution itself would do better, if both selection pressure and readiness were respectively less and as able - I will explain what I mean.

Say there is a selection pressure of predation for a given species - let's say the horse. When that horse encounters this threat, speed is needed [to escape] and those that develop that trait will escape the predator - let's say a dinosaur - and those that do not develop enough speed will be caught and killed. The premise I want to make clear, is that simply developing speed on its own will not free the horse from the dinosaur: actually it is a specific range of speeds that will work.

The point being that aiming at the greatest possible speed, takes time that horses do not have - in essence it is a Nash equilibrium, to develop near to the necessary speed, but not necessarily the maximum (that would be 'Trivial Evolution').

So Evolution facilitates best, when it is not taken as law - in other words - or that if it is: it is only partially (partial Evolution).

I think my logic is sound, but I put it to you to reply!

Your heart is gracious. 2 things to keep in mind are first that what the vocal proponents of evolution are proclaiming as Science fact is not about fast horses or big dogs, but about random unguided mutations which over time and selection (like avoiding dinosaurs) produce new complex systems, and in the end, new species. Most thoughtful Believers of Scripture acknowledge Adaption (some call it micro-evolution) as part of God's work, and can find common ground with Science thinking people, willing to discuss different theories on the particulars. Your insight about selection was most welcome, and helps me to marvel all the more about God's creation. Second, I have observed that many of the present prominent proponents of Evolution also insist on a life philosophy with no place for God and His purpose or power. Some, in order to deny the possibility of God, even go so far as to suggest instead Super-Alien interaction, or unprovable ideas like the Multi-Universe. They are preaching a Faith in Science, Scientism, rather than examination of evidence. They don't want there to be a Creator God, and so they deny Him. Recognize this, there may be an agenda behind the "science". If talking with a reasonable science-minded person, it might also be productive to point out the difference between examination of evidence and the faith of Scientism masquerading as Science. And as you seemed to suggest, a civil, caring conversation would go a lot further towards proclaiming the Truth than Scientist bashing.

 

[tbenedetto]

1 Corinthians 1:10
10Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

Isaiah 40:28
28Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.

Genesis 1
20And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
23And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

 

[Tayla]

instead of arguing with Evolutionists, maybe we could come together and agree that certain things are true - in relation to Evolution?

The only problem is that any kind of evolution via intelligent design is provably false. There is no possible mechanism for this intelligent designer to interact with the molecules of the genes and etc in order to modify their activities according to some master plan. And pure randomness as the source of all mutations and gene copying errors and etc is, of course, impossible. Therefore, the only remaining possibility is young earth creationism.

Christians should never under any circumstances capitulate to evolutionists for any reason. This includes theistic evolution and progressive creationism (Hugh Ross).

 

[The Barbarian]

Say there is a selection pressure of predation for a given species - let's say the horse. When that horse encounters this threat, speed is needed [to escape] and those that develop that trait will escape the predator - let's say a dinosaur - and those that do not develop enough speed will be caught and killed. The premise I want to make clear, is that simply developing speed on its own will not free the horse from the dinosaur: actually it is a specific range of speeds that will work.

I'm reminded of a story NFL player Jim Brown once told. He was camping with a friend, when they heard a sound like a bear outside the tent. Brown got up and started putting on his shoes.

"Jim, you can't outrun a bear." his friend said.

"I don't need to outrun him. I only need to outrun you."

 

[The Barbarian]

The only problem is that any kind of evolution via intelligent design is provably false. There is no possible mechanism for this intelligent designer to interact with the molecules of the genes and etc in order to modify their activities according to some master plan.

It's called "front loading." It means the Creator made a world in which things would unfold as He wished. It's one of the few reasonable ideas of ID. And the Creator can use randomness just as easily as He can use necessity to do His will.

And pure randomness as the source of all mutations and gene copying errors and etc is, of course, impossible.

Wrong. Quantum events are irreducibly random. So mutations from chemical events or radiation are indeed random in the strict sense.

Therefore, the only remaining possibility is young earth creationism.

Nope. Darwnian evolution, being directly observed to happen, is the only way we know it happens.

Christians should never under any circumstances capitulate to YE creationists for any reason. A Christian should never be afraid of the truth.

 

[JackRT]

I think that it is always wise to accept reality. Eventually theology will catch up.

 

[Gottservant]

It's a two way street: if you say "no, I have enough speed: I'll just wait" you may be wrong.