Calling all young earth creationists!

[Youtellme]

Astonishing how this one still gets trotted out, as though creationists really think it's a clincher. There is no law demanding species must change over time: in unchanging environments the mechanisms underlying evolution favour stasis, not change.

Sorry to butt in, but I was wondering how the environment, wherever that living fossil lived, stayed the same the whole time? Wouldn't all the other animals in the same place not change either? Have spiders and sharks pretty much stayed the same too? Er...sorry, stupid question but you know, I'm bored.

 

[Youtellme]

Ever read anything by Joseph Campbell?

No, sorry. What do you recommend?

 

[fantome profane]

So, as you can see, there are several ways to interpret even the word "myth"!

Yes, so when talking to Draka your task is to try to understand what she means when she uses the word myth. So do you? Do you understand what she means (Joseph Campbell was a hint)

On another point. There are many Christians who accept the theory of evolution and believe in Jesus as their saviour. There are scientists who believe this, there are priests who believe this. Have you really tried to understand their position on this? Why do you think this is a contradiction?

 

[Ouroboros]

Astonishing how this one still gets trotted out, as though creationists really think it's a clincher. There is no law demanding species must change over time: in unchanging environments the mechanisms underlying evolution favour stasis, not change.

And also, my understanding is that in "living fossils" there's a very high number of synonymous genetic variations, i.e. mutations that don't change phenotype much or at all, and they have a higher number of markers too. These are, if I'm not wrong, expected in a "living fossil" and have been confirmed too.

 

[Youtellme]

On another point. There are many Christians who accept the theory of evolution and believe in Jesus as their saviour. There are scientists who believe this, there are priests who believe this. Have you really tried to understand their position on this? Why do you think this is a contradiction?

It's quite simple. It's to do with the Ransom Sacrifice. Let me ask you; does the Bible say that Adam was created? Does it say that sin entered into the world through one man? Does it say that man's relationship with God was damaged by this? Does it say that in order for things to put right there would be a "last Adam?"; who would make it possible to have an approved relationship with God? You'll find the answer is yes.

So, if there was no Adam then there's no need for the Ransom. This doesn't mean that a man called Jesus (or something similar) didn't exist. He just wasn't the son of God of Christianity.
Therefore, scriptually, evolution doesn't add up.

 

[Draka]

No, sorry. What do you recommend?

"The Hero with a Thousand Faces" is a classic starter, it helps to understand archetypes and how they appear throughout all mythologies. Being familiar with the writing of Carl Jung and having a general grasp of what the "Collective Unconscious" is is also helpful. "The Power of Myth" might be another to look at, but really, just about anything you pick up from him might be enlightening, those would just be maybe baby steps into what I am referring to.

Myth is so much more than just stories or tales or random "legends" when you scrape the surface and look at them as a whole. They are a way of speaking to so much more about us. Which is why I say it is possible to actually get more from your scripture if you were to learn to take from it in a way that was allegorical or metaphorical rather than literally. Let it speak to a greater importance on a different level rather than just a "this is this and that happened here" history lesson. You might be surprised.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

It's quite simple. It's to do with the Ransom Sacrifice. Let me ask you; does the Bible say that Adam was created? Does it say that sin entered into the world through one man? Does it say that man's relationship with God was damaged by this? Does it say that in order for things to put right there would be a "last Adam?"; who would make it possible to have an approved relationship with God? You'll find the answer is yes.

Unless you choose to believe that most, or all, of that is metaphorical. Which evidence indicates it is, since all the available evidence on the origin of humanity contradicts the literal Biblical account.

Millions upon millions of Christians see no conflict between their beliefs and the theory of evolution, so why are your beliefs - or the beliefs of JWs in general - so much different? As far as I'm concerned, if your belief system either requires a literal Adam and Eve or requires evolution to not be true, then your belief system is wrong.

 

[Youtellme]

As far as I'm concerned, if your belief system either requires a literal Adam and Eve or requires evolution to not be true, then your belief system is wrong.

And this is the struggle I face.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

And this is the struggle I face.

Then either try and reinterpret your beliefs so that you can also accept the facts, or else drop your religion entirely. If a religious belief tells you that facts are not facts, it's time to stop holding on to it.

 

[Youtellme]

Then either try and reinterpret your beliefs so that you can also accept the facts, or else drop your religion entirely. If a religious belief tells you that facts are not facts, it's time to stop holding on to it.

Easier said then done. And not easy if you are married to one! And your whole social circle are the same. And still, I'm still not 100% convinced evolution adds up, still a few holes.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Easier said then done. And not easy if you are married to one! And your whole social circle are the same. And still, I'm still not 100% convinced evolution adds up, still a few holes.

Well, it's really a personal decision, so I can't really tell you what's best for you - just that, as far as I'm concerned, I would most definitely not want to associate myself with a belief system which depended on denying reality. If there's any questions you have about evolution, in the meantime, feel free to ask.

 

[johnhanks]

Sorry to butt in, but I was wondering how the environment, wherever that living fossil lived, stayed the same the whole time? Wouldn't all the other animals in the same place not change either? Have spiders and sharks pretty much stayed the same too? Er...sorry, stupid question but you know, I'm bored.

The term "living fossil" can be a misleading one, suggesting a more absolute identity between ancient and modern forms than actually exists. Bear in mind too that animals living in the same place need not be experiencing identical environments - there's more to environment than locality. The point remains that there is nothing in evolutionary theory that demands radical change over time.

And also, my understanding is that in "living fossils" there's a very high number of synonymous genetic variations, i.e. mutations that don't change phenotype much or at all, and they have a higher number of markers too. These are, if I'm not wrong, expected in a "living fossil" and have been confirmed too.

Right on.

 

[Joshua Tilghman]

Hi,

I was wondering about your thoughts of Genesis 2:4:
These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

From what I know, the "Days" in chapter one are believed by you to be literal 24hr days. However in this verse, the whole creative process is described as "the day", or a single day.

So, I'd really like your thoughts on this. Thanks

The days are definitely not literal since the earth spinning on its axis give us morning and evening and the sun had not yet been created in the first few days. The days are explanations of how God's creative power emanated from the higher spiritual worlds to finally manifest the physical world. It's actually more akin to evolution than literal creation.