Three Big Questions

[Radagast]

1. Does anybody else believe that Christianity and evolution can coexist with one another?

Many people do; they are called theistic evolutionists. See biologos.org

2. If so in what ways? (I'm asking before I state my beliefs because I want to see if they line up with mine.)

There are several slightly different versions. For example, some people accept evolution, but deny the evolution of human beings.

3. Since the Bible doesn't say one way or the other, is it possible that God created life on other planets?

It's possible.

Since the Bible doesn't mention it, and there's no evidence of it, it's unlikely.

 

[Philip Bruce Heywood]

If BioLogos was to seriously publish the facts the controversy would cease and they would be out of a job. Not that I am saying they are paid. For all I know they are well meaning volunteers. Bless them all.
Eh, what do you make of continental drift -- this has always puzzled --- it obviously has not re-worked the main continental shields/massifs. Half Australia and large parts of other continents besides retain Pre-Cambrian strata. That's upwards of 3-4 thou. mill. yrs. If continents were randomly subducting, plunging downwards into the upper mantle like conveyor belts, sooner or later all rocks would be recycled. Diamonds, gold iron ore ... all gone back into the stew. Melted, or at least rendered stratigraphically unrecognizable. I suspect something like the 'keel' underneath the continental massif must keep it as a discreet, stable body. We don't subduct on a uniform planet- wide schedule. Sideslip of course comes into play.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If BioLogos was to seriously publish the facts the controversy would cease and they would be out of a job. Not that I am saying they are paid. For all I know they are well meaning volunteers. Bless them all.
Eh, what do you make of continental drift -- this has always puzzled --- it obviously has not re-worked the main continental shields/massifs. Half Australia and large parts of other continents besides retain Pre-Cambrian strata. That's upwards of 3-4 thou. mill. yrs. If continents were randomly subducting, plunging downwards into the upper mantle like conveyor belts, sooner or later all rocks would be recycled. Diamonds, gold iron ore ... all gone back into the stew. Melted, or at least rendered stratigraphically unrecognizable. I suspect something like the 'keel' underneath the continental massif must keep it as a discreet, stable body. We don't subduct on a uniform planet- wide schedule. Sideslip of course comes into play.

Continents do not subduct. Continental crust is less dense than oceanic crust, so it "floats". As a result when continental crust collides with oceanic crust, the oceanic crust subducts. The entire western edge of the New World is an example of this. When continental crust runs into continental crust neither goes under. Huge mountain ranges result, the Himalayas today is an example of this. The Appalachian mountains were an example of that, but it occurred several hundred millions of years ago and there is not much left of them.

 

[pitabread]

He wrote a book about the origin of species which, if the book were true, means species would not exist. If species could grade into each other, species would not exist.

Technically speaking, species don't exist. Species categorizations are invented by humans for the purpose of talking about different groups of biological organisms.

Trying to divide biological populations in nature is problematic, which is why multiple species concepts exist and barriers between species are sometimes quite fuzzy.

 

[April_Rose]

Everybody is aware that I don't have a clue what's going on right?

 

[Speedwell]

Everybody is aware that I don't have a clue what's going on right?

If you wanted, you could give us some idea of what your special needs are. Perhaps that would help us to communicate with you

 

[April_Rose]

If you wanted, you could give us some idea of what your special needs are. Perhaps that would help us to communicate with you

I'm mentally challenged which means I don't understand a lot of the big words and long paragraphs with them in it. Sorry for the inconvenience.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I'm mentally challenged which means I don't understand a lot of the big words and long paragraphs with them in it. Sorry for the inconvenience.

I'm sorry for your difficulty. You might try asking specific questions about what you don't understand. If you don't, those responding to you don't know what it is you're having trouble with.

 

[Radagast]

I'm mentally challenged which means I don't understand a lot of the big words

That's OK. Some of the people using big words don't understand them either.

Like @Tinker Grey said, it's better if you ask questions that are a bit more specific. Your question #2 ("In what ways can Christianity and evolution coexist with one another?") really deserves a 100-page answer.

 

[April_Rose]

That's OK. Some of the people using big words don't understand them either.

Like @Tinker Grey said, it's better if you ask questions that are a bit more specific. Your question #2 ("In what ways can Christianity and evolution coexist with one another?") really deserves a 100-page answer.

Yeah I guess you're right,.. sorry.

 

[Radagast]

Yeah I guess you're right,.. sorry.

Don't be sorry.

I would also suggest that if you want Christian answers, that you ask here: Creation & Theistic Evolution

 

[April_Rose]

Don't be sorry.

I would also suggest that if you want Christian answers, that you ask here: Creation & Theistic Evolution

Okay thank you and I like you so I think I'm going to follow you. (I like everybody here so far though. )

 

[Radagast]

.

 

[Philip Bruce Heywood]

The species problem -- especially peculiar to palaeontologists because they can't bring the creatures back to life. It can become a problem to biologists if they are brain-soaked in Darwinism and step off the straight and narrow of objectivity.
Firstly, Hybridization happens, and obfuscates, but it is not speciation. Obviously. We could make a new species every minute if hybridization produced species. What a scene!
Secondly, the species definition essentially universally accepted in relation to sexually reproducing creatures insists that the ultimate test is ability to reproduce viable offspring which continue viable down the line. Together they reproduce viable offspring, same species. No viable offspring, different species.
Thirdly, the big caveat. The only way to be 100% certain is to observe the creatures in question out in the 'wild' generation after generation to give Nature its chance to speak for itself. NO EFFECT NOR INTERFERENCE BY MAN. We won't be fulfilling that requirement any time soon? Species exist even if the boundaries appear blurred. The calm scientific method.
Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.Etc.

 

[Gene2memE]

Firstly, Hybridization happens, and obfuscates, but it is not speciation. Obviously.

Obviously not:

Error - Cookies Turned Off

https://repository.si.edu/bitstream...rmingham_Salcedo_Jiggins_and_Linares_2006.pdf

Speciation and hybridization in invasive fire ants

https://www.pnas.org/content/115/39/9761

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm mentally challenged which means I don't understand a lot of the big words and long paragraphs with them in it. Sorry for the inconvenience.

No one will make fun of you for serious questions. Evolution is really not that hard to understand, at least the basics are not. It is when it gets down to the cellular level that it gets extremely difficult, but you would not be the only one that could not understand that.

Go ahead, ask your questions. You will find that people will gladly help you. In fact you would be a breath of fresh air and very welcome here.

 

[April_Rose]

No one will make fun of you for serious questions. Evolution is really not that hard to understand, at least the basics are not. It is when it gets down to the cellular level that it gets extremely difficult, but you would not be the only one that could not understand that.

Go ahead, ask your questions. You will find that people will gladly help you. In fact you would be a breath of fresh air and very welcome here.

Okay thanks, I can't think of any right now though.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Okay thanks, I can't think of any right now though.

No rush, no pressure.

 

[Philip Bruce Heywood]

Scientific evidence is evidence which serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis. That's quoting Subduction-- who is deducting. Go and have a dig with him and discover these fire ants that are new species. Let us now re-quote with a more realistic statement. Scientific evidence is evidence which serves to either support or counter what is currently the politically correct/in vogue scientific theory or hypothesis -- thus giving it more seeming kudos. This suggests herd think could happen.
Sorry to interrupt the train of thought: As Galileo has it: "Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe." The only scientific evidence is realistic stuff which works.

Like, not ducks being crossed with swans to accommodate gooses.

Hybrids regularly happen in lower forms of life and it's anybody's guess as to their correct taxonomic placement. Being in agriculture to some extent I know this because what appear to be new species arise with monotonous regularity. E.g., Wheat is wheat, rye is rye, triticale is triticale -- but triticale is a recent breeding outcome of wheat and rye.

But anyone reading the Bible might suspect as much because it says simple or plant grade life was merely m-a-d-e (this is a translation) but complex life was c-r-e-a-t-e-d. There is a quantum leap of difference between the two words. Ducks don't cross with swans to be geese and cats don't cross with wombats to make womcats. Fireants don't even cross with water beetles to cool off.

 

[inquiring mind]

Technically speaking, species don't exist. Species categorizations are invented by humans for the purpose of talking about different groups of biological organisms.

Trying to divide biological populations in nature is problematic, which is why multiple species concepts exist and barriers between species are sometimes quite fuzzy.

I guess that's why the Bible uses the term 'Kind.'