Evolution

[giantsdodie]

Exactly. The chance of the amino acids in a DNA molecule to randomly connect together to create the proteins that sustain life are 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1

This is what mathmeticians and scientists say the possibilities are. They consider that 1 followed by 20 zeros is a mathematical IMPOSSIBILITY. But yet they calculate this possibility as a 1 followed by 65 zeroes !!!! And yet even though by science evolution is considered impossible and the fact that iy breaks two of the fundamental laws of science this LIE is promoted by schools and The fact that the universe and everything in it has an intelligent creator is rebuffed.

Believing evolution is like being at an auto junkyard and seeing a tornado blow through and believing that a fully functioning fully working car will be put together by chance...

Ludicrious

[ybrown]

Amen! We've got to know the Biblical account, as well as the science so that we don't fold like $2 suits when someone challenges US on this issue and tries to force this nonsensical rubbish.

[keita]

AMEN!

I agree that

If we're speaking of evolution in the classical Darwinian sense, then it makes no sense to say that God created through means of evolution...

Illogical, indeed.

I also agree that

The chance of the amino acids in a DNA molecule to randomly connect together to create the proteins that sustain life are 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1...

Irrational, indeed.


I believe God and His Word. Therefore, "if we're speaking of evolution in the classical Darwinian sense", that would be not only illogical and mathematically irrational but also, and most importantly, a spiritual impossibility for we who believe in Creation.

But, with regard to the particular book excerpt I shared, that "if" is exactly my point.

What actually made the excerpt interesting to me was what I saw as the uncharacteristic absence of classical Darwinism. I was most intrigued by the possibility of seeing what is commonly expressed as "evolution" being identified and rather unususally redefined as:

a revelation of God "through the processes of creating"

and

a "continuing process of creation".

As I said earlier, to me, the excerpt offered an interesting perspective in its presentation of the possibility and attempt to rework and (re)connect the language/concepts of "evolution" and Creation. That same approach is also largely what I respect and admire about the work of Dr. Carl Baugh. It is an approach that I believe is and will be important to carrying out this wise admonition:

We've got to know the Biblical account, as well as the science so that we don't fold like $2 suits when someone challenges US on this issue and tries to force this nonsensical rubbish.

which, btw, once again...I agree with!

[Nikkol]

This post was moved to the UCC thread here.

keita

[ybrown]

This post was moved to the UCC thread here.

keita

[krazeeboi]

I really enjoy Dr. Baugh and his guests. I think we need more exposure to this type of ministry in the church today.

Some of the best stuff I've read on evolution from a Christian perspective is on the Stand to Reason website, which is committed to equipping Christians to defend the faith.

Now, speaking of evolution from a non-Darwinian perspective is interesting indeed. I somewhat agree with the author's assessment of "the continuing process of creation," if she is speaking from a micro-evolutionary point of view. Macro-evolution speaks of the evolving of one "kind" into another "kind" (e.g., fish --> amphibians, amphibians --> reptiles, reptiles --> birds, birds --> mammals), while micro-evolution has to do with variations within one specific kind (e.g., different breeds of dogs, species of birds, etc.). I agree with the latter, but disagree with the former.