Tuesday, June 9, 2009
A Response to Alan
A Response to Alan
(over the origin of life on Earth)
Hey Big Al !
You raised a very thoughtful and intriguing question, one that I am sure many ask themselves. Was life on Earth created in 6 literal days, or did life evolve gradually over a much longer timespan? Actually, the question itself really should be broken down into a series of other questions, because often philosophy and pre-existing assumed conditions are intermixed with the question of the origin of life. Please see my articles regarding the philosophical side of atheism and the origin of species (where I get to take on Dr. Richard Dawkins, Dr. Christopher Hitchens and other famous atheists) here: http://houtchblog.blogspot.com/2008/07/hitchens-vs-houtchens.html; http://houtchblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/in-defense-of-faith-part-ii.html; http://houtchblog.blogspot.com/2007/08/in-defense-of-faith.html. Also please see my three part series, "Do You Have an Answer?"
There is enough reading there to keep you busy for a while, but let me cut to the point of evolution, specifically. When I teach my students evolution, I precede the unit by telling them it is not important to believe evolution, but rather to understand the material so that they may 1. do well on the state mandated standardized tests and 2. so they may make an informed judgement for themselves. Skeptecism has an important place in any purely scientific investigation. Indeed, I tell them not to believe *me,* but to be wary of philosophy creeping into any scientific arguments.
From a personal standpoint, I am on the fence evolution-wise. Could life have arisen by evolution exactly as scientists say? Sure! Can it be indisputably proven? Nope! Does this water down the gospel in my opinion? No, for this would only reveal my incomplete understanding of scripture, not scripture as a representation of Gods truth as being inspired by His Holy Spirit being wrong. The more we realize how very *little* we know, both from a physical and a spiritual perspective, the better off we are.
Some (many) scientists are not willing to accept spiritual truth. They are skeptical of anything metaphysical, and this is their decision. The spiritual realm lends itself very poorly to repeated proof limited to the 5 senses. Besides, if they did, they might actually have to say "we were wrong," and THIS is what they are actually avoiding. It's philosophical arrogance.
Now, is it possible that the Earth and all things in existence formed in 6 physical days? Sure! Why not? It's not like we had someone there with a video camera recording it for posterity to disprove it.
Either way, its ok by me, because creation itself cries out God's existance ( I think that's an argument St. Paul used,) and that shows how wonderful and awesome and magnificent our Lord is.
That help? I hope so, cause I am out of time.
Peace of Christ to you-