Quote:
Originally posted by Absynthe:
This is the kind of discussion that I come here for...
Having read through every post (it's a slow day here) I noticed a couple of things I'll toss out:
It seems that the battle between evolution and creationism is one of fear. Specifically, the fear of being wrong.
For the creationists, proof of anything that flatly contradicts the revealed truth in which they believe is equal to a dismissal of their faith. (faith here as in the entirety of their belief system, not their personal acceptance of a specific article)
For the evolutionists, the existence of a primal urge which created life and has revealed knowledge which is untestable and irreproducible would completely undermine the rationale of scientific rigor.
Nobody likes to be wrong, and the closer that the wrong is to your very raison d'etre, the more one wants to dispute and dismiss it. What seems to be lacking in both camps is the potential that they are both perhaps partially right. Attalus's testament to his viewpoint is the only mention of this possibility.
So I ask both sides, why? Why is it one or the other, and not perhaps some of each? Is there no room in either system for elements of the other to be possible?
|
But if course.
There are Christian evolutionists. As Nachrafe mentioned there is the belief in partial evolution - which I have. That is evolution within a species, but not the mutations evolution theory needs to work.
I simply don't find enough scientific evidence to swallow an evolution theory that is always changing with new 'evidence'. If the evidence was there I'd believe it, yet still hold my theology to be true.
[ 12-04-2002, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]