>I believe that God established the rules and regulations for evolution by His creation of DNA. He knew that this would eventually lead to the development of a being that would achieve a high enough level of consciousness to appreciate that "somebody" had set all of this up. It was at this time that He blessed Man with a soul and gave us Free Will to accept or reject Him.
>I do not believe that God directs all things that happen. He establishes the conditions and then allows most things to progress according to His natural laws. The study of His natural laws is called Science and one of these laws is called evolution.
>Darwin did not invent evolution; he recognized it as one of God's laws. He knew nothing of DNA. We do. Study DNA and you will find that it is so beautiful that only God could have created it.
I can't believe I'm jumping into one of these useless crevo threads, but here I am. I well appreciate the efforts of some on the evo side, although sometimes it seems like a believe in God is not something they spend much time on. Whether that's for the reason of retaining a divide between 'us and them,' I don't know. Regardless, they make a lot more sense to me than Creationists do who yammer on about how evolution is a religion, that's for sure.
Your post is one of the most sensible I've seen in many months of lurking on these threads. I don't agree with it entirely, but it's probably as close to my own personal belief system as anything else I've seen. Speaking of which, I may define my own in the course of this thread, or post, depending on whether I care enough to or whether I'm asked, but it's not my intent. These threads are far too entertaining, and occasionally informative and even thought-provoking (sometimes on both sides) for me to want to make it about me in any way, shape, or form. If I do go in that direction, my apologies. I'm not looking to clobber the forum with my way, though I think it's best for me, because I'm not interested in imposing it on anyone else, all the more so since those who typically do that feel the need to pull quotes from this or that version of this book that's apparently very important to them, that I frankly just don't give a rat's tail about. If it's important to you, fine. You'd be wasting your time trying to shape my own spirituality with anything like that, so, for both of our sake's, please, don't bother. If I ever change my mind, I'll be the first to humbly admit I was wrong, but for now, I will say that the less I see of that, the more willing I am to take a person seriously. Most folks I know who are deeply religious have the decency to refrain from quoting Scripture to people who don't want to hear it. It's downright rude.
The seemingly endless quoting of Scripture to support a point about the worthlessness, evil, or outright fraud of Darwin, usually on the basis that is involves views not compatible with Christianity? We simply don't all care about the Bible, nor do we have to, last I looked. We don't all believe in Jesus, either.
Some of us do, however, believe in God, and have respect for Darwin's work. Not because it's necessarily correct beyond a reasonable doubt, for damn sure; but clouding a rational evaluation in some quarters is the inexplicable insistence by some folks that it's hardly impossible to believe that one can assign validity to the theory based on the evidence without being some sort of Godless heathen. Oh, and, for Pete's sakes, looking at it as something that might actually hold great truth is too often dismissed as invalid because of the absurd canard that too many have turned it into the religion-of-sorts some of you seem to think characterizes some large percentage of people who've actually learned about the subject.
It's NOT a religion, even if a very small percentage of those introduced to it go on to view it in the terms you most vehemently complain about, ala Ann Coulter, that it's some sort of offshoot of liberalism, one to be thought of as any other movement that most folks should consider laughable if examined within the context of religion per se. Which I find to be highly insulting towards those intelligent and thoughtful posters who enrich this board with enormous volumes of information, much easily understood by the layman, which helps to make and illustrate some points that are apparently quite relevant, even to those of us who are not scientists & don't have a working knowledge of the subject...but, perhaps, just enough to figure that a scientific theory laid out as this one is just might carry an ounce or two more weight than the notion that the Creation Scientists are on the mark with their findings that the planet is 10,000 years old or less (because of course that's the most obvious time frame that can be arrived at with their approved interpretation of the relevant portions of Scripture).
Now, I'm sure you guys have ready-made retorts, perhaps even rewritten by the folks--who sport no agendas, of course, how could anyone look at it any other way?--who helm such reputable organizations as Answers in (that band Peter Gabriel used to play in, whatever the heck that is). But, hey...I'm not looking to offend anyone. The nastiness on these threads is unfortunate, mostly because it doesn't do too much, at least in my eyes, to strike a blow for the cause of conservatism. And I do remember last year, the likes of George Will & Charles Krauthammer, writing clear, specific pieces on why teaching ID in the public schools was simply a bad idea. Oh, yeah, and the folks who I'll just say are more religious, for whom ID simply was not God-like enough, let alone evolution. What was the thread? God said it, that settles it? Something like that. The more deeply religious among us don't have much use for ID, anyway. Hey, maybe they have a point. Who really knows?
We can spin our wheels all we want. For those for us for whom the Bible is merely a book, we can believe that God & evolution can co-exist, we can feel that there's no easy answer as to how much of a role God plays in Creation, since none of us were actually there to see it, and we can look at these threads as unfortunate but inevitable name-calling that may not do much good, but apparently lets off a lot of steam.
Heather McDonald's piece from a few weeks ago was excellent. I don't know that she's an atheist, but she found it curious that God is worth thanking when good things happen, or when bad things don't, but strangely absent from the equation is any criticism when bad things do actually happen. But, hey, she's just one of those Northeasterners, what the heck do they know, anyway.
Me, I'll accept that my belief in God is secure enough that I can withstand anyone who wants to tell me anything they like about my refusal to believe in their God, to not offer much significance to what Jesus represents to a lot of people, and even less to a Bible I have no use for. And if my choice of God is wrong, I'll have to face up to that, and It's not something I fear in the least. Hit me with all the hellfire & brimstone you feel is appropriate, and I'll take it under consideration; and I'll continue to leave pamphlets I'm handed that I have no use for, conspicuously near Islamic Cultural Centers. If there's anyone who needs your ideas of God, it's probably those sadly misguided malcontents.
But while I won't speculate on how much of a role the God I believe in may have played in creation AND/OR evolution, I will say that it'll take a heck of a lot more than a consistently nasty flame war on a message board to shake my faith in my interpretation of who and/or what God is.
In the meantime, I keep an open mind about evolution. If there's something out there that appears to make more sense, I'm all for it. I haven't seen it, or anything like it. The evos on this board do what I consider to be a tremendous job with their posts, the info in those posts, and not being afraid to answer admittedly tough questions that might just be beyond my ability to form a decent answer...if I cared enough to. Believe whatever you want to believe. The anti-evolutionist stuff is foolish & counterproductive so far as I can see; that it's not good enough for some people that the Pope can see no conflict is something that leads me to believe that he's just not considered what I grew up thinking he was looked upon as--a religious leader with at least a modicum of wisdom, and one worthy of some measure of respect. Oh, well, have fun.
I'll keep my faith & my spirituality to myself, and I'll live with whatever consequences that entails. And if someone comes along with a better view on things than evolution, I'll certainly take an open-minded look at it, but I suspect I shouldn't hold my breath.
I'm curious. Since you don't subscribe to the Judeo/Christian God...then what God do you believe in.
John 6:28-2928. Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
29. Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."