Ah, there I am, Theistic Evolution, right there just a hair up from Atheistic Evolution. My more fundamentalist friends will be dismayed I'm sure. :-)
I got this little chart from the National Center for Science Education website while reading this article about the Creation Evolution Continuum. What it essentially means is that while acknowledging that God indeed has created and sustains and guides the cosmos, I also acknowledge the legitimate findings of science concerning such things as the age of the earth and the common descent of current life from one or a few original, simple forms. I also agree with the Catholics that humans were specially endowed with a soul at some point in this process but that we and the great apes may very well be physically descended from a common ancestor.
The idea of Progressive Creation as exemplified by Reasons to Believes Hugh Ross and his ministry is quite attractive to me, because the science is so much better than that of AnswersInGenesis and the other Young Earth bozos, but I find it unsatisfying in the end, it simply does not have the ring of truth for me. There is way to much compelling evidence for common descent that they try to explain away, it just won't really work as science. Besides, I don't really see the need for it theologically, Christianity does not depend on it.
I got this little chart from the National Center for Science Education website while reading this article about the Creation Evolution Continuum. What it essentially means is that while acknowledging that God indeed has created and sustains and guides the cosmos, I also acknowledge the legitimate findings of science concerning such things as the age of the earth and the common descent of current life from one or a few original, simple forms. I also agree with the Catholics that humans were specially endowed with a soul at some point in this process but that we and the great apes may very well be physically descended from a common ancestor.
The idea of Progressive Creation as exemplified by Reasons to Believes Hugh Ross and his ministry is quite attractive to me, because the science is so much better than that of AnswersInGenesis and the other Young Earth bozos, but I find it unsatisfying in the end, it simply does not have the ring of truth for me. There is way to much compelling evidence for common descent that they try to explain away, it just won't really work as science. Besides, I don't really see the need for it theologically, Christianity does not depend on it.
Hello fellow INTP Lutheran, I'm glad you posted this info, because I haven't found an exact place on the scale for me yet. Only because I haven't searched one out, mind you.
ReplyDeleteJust the other day, when I went on a "we aren't different races" rant, I then thought about the creation theories, and how they fit in with that. Ironically you were thinking things in the same direction.
Will check out your links on it now....
So far, I also agree that the "primordial soup" theory has no real possibility, not hard to believe.
ReplyDeleteI believe I must fall somewhere between Theistic Evolution and Progressive Creationism, but I am not sure of the boundaries in both those rankings at this time.
Young Earth theory is not a possibility for me, for the mere fact that I strongly believe we are indeed all related, and firmly believe that the different "races" theory is garbage. Therefore, we had to change over a period of time.
Now whether that is rooted in the folic acid idea, the sunlight factor, or just the concept that humans early on had more variety of features within the small tribe, I don't know. I do know people can look different in a small amount of generations, so I lean towards some possible environmental factors mixed in with our own human genes mixing things up as the source.
Will have to read in depth the categories, maybe I can find a more specific area for me!
Cool, I'm not attached to any one spot on the continuum, but I am no where near the Young Earth end I know for sure. I enjoy listening to the Reasons to Believe podcasts but it really seems like they are stretching quite a bit to deny common descent when it seems pretty obvious to me. :-)
ReplyDeleteThe "gap" creation department just seems to be a add-on for another bad theory. I never heard of that before.
ReplyDeleteGreat resources, thank you!