Hi there,
So I have reached a point where I realize there are ways to agree, between what has to happen by chance and what has to happen by design (and to a certain extent what has to happen by choice - but we will get to that later)... It is not the case that God rules out chance, in order to design His Creation. I think we get confused as Creationists, when they see us appealing to God as if we are saying "no more chances, from now on" - really what we are saying is "as much as I knew to do, I did - now God, take your chances!". It is a fundamental fact that no believer can escape, we still need to take our chances.
This not taking chances thing, is serious and it is something that Evolution prides itself on - too much I would say, but then I know God doesn't create monkeys for the purpose of later creating humans. Nevermind that Evolution prides itself on something, the point is that it expressly appeals to chances of all kinds, in order to make its point, that eventually a chance given strength creeps in. Is it God that allows that strength to creep in? I would say "yes, but with the caveat, that He does not (never does) it randomly" Why? Because God does not want to let go of the hope, that one day we will see eye to eye with Him and communicate with Him, as such.
What can be married between Creation and Evolution, then, is that micro-Evolution is able to take greater chances, especially when taken together with the strength of Creation science, that having been created with this foundation and what is like it, nothing need change. There really is a way to accept that you will have to take chances with your Creation, and then when you do, Evolution is the most accurate way to model the interactions between you and the rest of your species from then on. This way, we keep the window open, to the breeze outside at the beginning of time!
There will be objections, like "I don't want to think about God", "Evolution and chances is all I want to take", "if God created Evolution, why didn't He create Himself?" and so on and so forth. But the fundamental point, is that we will no longer be arguing everything: the Creationists will have his ambiguous beginning (if you don't call "let there be light" ambiguous, we may not be on the same page regarding some aspects of our faith!) and the Evolutionists, will be able to throw themselves, holus bolus, at changing every last thing that feeds on the desire to be different and still accepted by those that were comfortable with whom they were - even if Evolution and Creation both flew to the wind.
There are things that will have to go: "monkeys don't start to learn English, before they become human" we literally have no link between a monkeys heart and a human's mind, "mutations are a good thing", they aren't to something that's working (and can substitute it!), "if you wait long enough, the difference between Creation and Evolution is moot" actually what Creation offers is distinction beyond this life into the next, you can't have more difference than that! Likewise "God said" is not "God expects"; "the word was God" still had to be written down; "behold your king" is something that takes a long, long, long time to understand. These are not permanent obstacles, but they can make someone who isn't prepared to make any compromizes (for good or bad, in principle) a lot more religious, than perhaps with hindsight, they would say themselves they "didn't need to be".
So that is it, I think the marriage can go from there, the weaker theory first Evolution, can start with chances for a given species and the stronger foundation can embrace both the findings there and the findings in the Spirit - just in time to make an appearance at an ethics committee! There is more to be discovered, but what we should be learning here, is that no discovery is made, by leaving more and more to aggression and consumant confusion. If we can beat this, we have a real chance at an open culture that welcomes piety in all its forms, with the one exception that if the Devil wants to make an argument = he can do it, with the pen!
I appreciate your wisdom, in this context.
Not to know the difference, is not not to speak up for it, if in time the difference was as we knew.
So I have reached a point where I realize there are ways to agree, between what has to happen by chance and what has to happen by design (and to a certain extent what has to happen by choice - but we will get to that later)... It is not the case that God rules out chance, in order to design His Creation. I think we get confused as Creationists, when they see us appealing to God as if we are saying "no more chances, from now on" - really what we are saying is "as much as I knew to do, I did - now God, take your chances!". It is a fundamental fact that no believer can escape, we still need to take our chances.
This not taking chances thing, is serious and it is something that Evolution prides itself on - too much I would say, but then I know God doesn't create monkeys for the purpose of later creating humans. Nevermind that Evolution prides itself on something, the point is that it expressly appeals to chances of all kinds, in order to make its point, that eventually a chance given strength creeps in. Is it God that allows that strength to creep in? I would say "yes, but with the caveat, that He does not (never does) it randomly" Why? Because God does not want to let go of the hope, that one day we will see eye to eye with Him and communicate with Him, as such.
What can be married between Creation and Evolution, then, is that micro-Evolution is able to take greater chances, especially when taken together with the strength of Creation science, that having been created with this foundation and what is like it, nothing need change. There really is a way to accept that you will have to take chances with your Creation, and then when you do, Evolution is the most accurate way to model the interactions between you and the rest of your species from then on. This way, we keep the window open, to the breeze outside at the beginning of time!
There will be objections, like "I don't want to think about God", "Evolution and chances is all I want to take", "if God created Evolution, why didn't He create Himself?" and so on and so forth. But the fundamental point, is that we will no longer be arguing everything: the Creationists will have his ambiguous beginning (if you don't call "let there be light" ambiguous, we may not be on the same page regarding some aspects of our faith!) and the Evolutionists, will be able to throw themselves, holus bolus, at changing every last thing that feeds on the desire to be different and still accepted by those that were comfortable with whom they were - even if Evolution and Creation both flew to the wind.
There are things that will have to go: "monkeys don't start to learn English, before they become human" we literally have no link between a monkeys heart and a human's mind, "mutations are a good thing", they aren't to something that's working (and can substitute it!), "if you wait long enough, the difference between Creation and Evolution is moot" actually what Creation offers is distinction beyond this life into the next, you can't have more difference than that! Likewise "God said" is not "God expects"; "the word was God" still had to be written down; "behold your king" is something that takes a long, long, long time to understand. These are not permanent obstacles, but they can make someone who isn't prepared to make any compromizes (for good or bad, in principle) a lot more religious, than perhaps with hindsight, they would say themselves they "didn't need to be".
So that is it, I think the marriage can go from there, the weaker theory first Evolution, can start with chances for a given species and the stronger foundation can embrace both the findings there and the findings in the Spirit - just in time to make an appearance at an ethics committee! There is more to be discovered, but what we should be learning here, is that no discovery is made, by leaving more and more to aggression and consumant confusion. If we can beat this, we have a real chance at an open culture that welcomes piety in all its forms, with the one exception that if the Devil wants to make an argument = he can do it, with the pen!
I appreciate your wisdom, in this context.
Not to know the difference, is not not to speak up for it, if in time the difference was as we knew.
