My thoughts on life, relationships, and everything else!

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

Can science and Christianity mesh Part 2: More on Evolutionary science and creation in Christianity and the scientific community

This Is an article in the New York times about the same thing as my last science post: whether or not a Scientist can be a Christian and hold the Bible as the truth and still be a true scientist and regard fact and theory as somewhat interchangeable. One thing that I disagree with the article on is that basically, scientists Cannot believe in Creationism or intelligent design.
"Although they embrace religious faith, these scientists also embrace science as it has been defined for centuries. That is, they look to the natural world for explanations of what happens in the natural world and they recognize that scientific ideas must be provisional - capable of being overturned by evidence from experimentation and observation. This belief in science sets them apart from those who endorse creationism or its doctrinal cousin, intelligent design, both of which depend on the existence of a supernatural force. "
But can't you still be objectionable and look for logical explanations in nature to an extent without denying the credibility of the bible? Here is where the intelligent design theory comes in ( The one with GOD in charge....Not the Raelien super space people theory, which is not to be confused with the Mormon Super Space Jesus thing). I personally am a bigger fan of this theory than many of the others I have heard of and feel it Is a prime example on how science an Christianity can mesh without treading on each others boundaries. Here is my personal, semi- intelligent design theory.
Genesis 1:1-10 states:
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
9 And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.

See, My belief is that everything happened as the bible states....God created everything. Every grain of sand Every atomic particle. But the Bible doesn't explain how God created everything, Just that he did. God says let there be light , BOOM!, there is light. It doesn't say where the light came from or what exactly caused it, But just that God wanted it there, so it was, and he made sure it was good. This is where I feel science has a place, and God definitely fills in the gaps. No matter what theory you look at or how thoroughly it is explained, none of them have a real starting point. I am NOT saying that all scientific theory is theology friendly. People DID NOT evolve from monkeys...It just didn't happen. We are one of Gods creations where we know that he actually formed and shaped us exactly how we are, But with the actual method the earth was formed and how long it took...It's like the debate of what happened to the dinosaurs, we probably will never know.
Some people base their belief in the evolutionary theory in the fact that the DNA of most animals look like DNA, but just have different chromosomes and such and also on the fact that no matter what the animal is, when it is in the embrotic stage of development...It looks like an embryo. Oh, woohooo. If you take this theory one step further, since they are carbon based, people MUST have came from rocks. I mean, Carbon Is most prodominant in rocks...Isn't it? My biggest argument with the genetic theory of proving Darwin correct is that most animals who are proven to have similar ancestors (ex. Donkeys, asses, mules and horses) can cross breed. Their genetic make-up allows them to cross breed. Same Genus, just possibly a different Species. People can't breed with monkeys, dogs, or even slugs. Not even the chickens who we look so much like in the embryotic stage. There is no possible way that we are as closely related to primates as they say we are, otherwise we would have the exact same number of chromosomes and would be able to breed with monkeys. Also our mental capacities would most likely be at a similar level due to the fact that the genetic make up would be close. Some darwinists combat this with the idea that there is a missing link ( its not technically missing to them, it's called LUCY) But even after extensive research, lucy can't even give enough info to tie the two together. I absolutely love bringing this point up in discussion ever since I i first learned about reproduction in genetics and how it relates to the three main theories of creation, all taught in my Biology 2 class in a public school. I have been more fortunate than most students. Every science class I have ever been in that dared to teach creation taught more than one theory. This happens more than people like to acknowledge, but is drowned out because a lot of parents (and many a student) don't want to go outside of their little world. I have sat through classes where they would teach on it and if it wasn't the creationist theory: most of the Christian students would leave the class or plug their ears, if it wasn't atheist theory: everyone else would treat it as humorous fairy tale. I am not saying we should all make our kids abandon their beliefs in the direction of science...But there is nothing wrong with knowing what other people believe .You can't argue against or fight something you know nothing about, And if we totally abandoned the world of science all together, there would be no medicines, doctors, or research on how to make our world a safer and better place to live.