Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: allmendream
I don't disagree with you.

However, I think you would admit that having "a lot of evidence" does not necessarily mean having ALL the evidence - the whole story (hence my tagline).

I admit that I muddied the waters of discussion by moving from evolution to origins. However, the point remains.

Certainly we can make extrapolations - even broad assumptions - from the evidence at hand. However, if we accept the idea of a creator, by default then, it behoves us to explore the idea that things may not be as they seem.

In this world, we see a finished product (creation). How we arrived at this product is of course the debate. How would our DNA appear if we were plunked down in the Garden vis-a-vis Eden instead of having been the product of natural selection?

What parameters can we put on the creator? What process does a creator use in the formation of a body, a planet - or the universe. The question really is: what does creation look like?! Must the creator conform to our requirements - or must we discover his?

35 posted on 08/16/2012 1:17:16 PM PDT by jonno (Having an opinion is not the same as having the answer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: jonno
Science never claims to have ALL the evidence - however a good theory has to deal with all the evidence that there currently is and explain it. The theory of evolution through natural selection, and the theory of common descent of species both are quite satisfactory in this regard.

Last Thursdayism is of no use to science. Sure everything could have been created last Thursday - with false memories and a false history. But such a supposition is of absolutely no use - because going on the assumption that (for example) World War II actually happened - will yield results in terms of knowing and predicting reality.

As to what our DNA looks like - it looks exactly like one would suppose a ‘whatever worked at the time’ collection of some useful and some discarded genetic programs with ‘families’ of similar genes looking exactly like they were duplicates ‘retrofitted’ and adapted to a new use rather than a new ‘perfect’ design de novo.

The Bible says I am created “from dust” and “to dust” I will return. But I was also created via cellular processes involving DNA. That apparently was how God created me “from dust”. Was my creation “from dust” less literal than the creation of Adam from dust?

36 posted on 08/16/2012 1:29:40 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

To: jonno
"And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden"

So, to plant a garden you already need seeds, or maybe cuttings, or could be a nursery somewhere depending on what you are planting.

No doubt God has something like a Tardis (in Dr. Who) which is bigger on the inside than out, with a myriad of rooms with all sorts of things ~ like greenhouses, maybe some studios to cut and paste genomes ~ all that stuff.

40 posted on 08/16/2012 1:47:39 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson