Well, these two views would have to be held by the majority of the people in the world regarding how our world came to be. Other philosophies would have a different title to EVOLUTIONDIDIT when concerning the formation of the universe by itself. Evolution works by the same principle by developing somehow or another by itself without any help from premeditated Guidance. An example would be the development of soils from rocks, its not evolution but the same idea is behind it.
I would tend to lump the IDON’TKNOWDIDIT’s with the EVOLUTIONDIDIT’s or similar by default, because they obviously think (in general) that whatever did bring our universe or world into being holds them with no accountability to anything... we just happened. Its like turning up to work without an understanding as to why exactly you turned up to work. You can leave when you want or stay when you want because you don't believe in a boss that pays your bills and gives you work.
I have just been to a creation science speaker a couple of weekends ago to hear him speak about several topics. He was a young-earther, so I tended to disagree with some of what he said, but he did bring out some interesting points which made me think. Points I found interesting was his stance on how different worldviews interpret data, so true! And we are all guilty of it to a degree. You can have layers of rocks with fossils of trees in it that look to an old earther as lots of layers formed overtime but when speaking of Yellowstone the trees did not have any roots which was interesting. This could possibly indicate that the trees were ripped from their original position (most likely a flood) and laid down in place like what happened to the logs at mount St Helens. But what I do not know is whether tree roots will fossilize with the tree? I will have to research.
However, I was not totally happy with his answer to ice cores and their layers that have been dug around the world. Reasons to Believe give a good argument for an old earth using the ice cores on their site and the reply didn’t do the argument justice I thought.
Anyway among lots of others things the talk was very interesting to listen too.
I do not know a lot about science, however I do know a little - I am half way through my apprenticeship and I have been finding it very interesting. I have basically been learning about how to grow plants and more specifically, how to grow orchids. Isn’t it amazing how wonderful God’s creation is! How it is so complex and interwoven within itself.
Acknowledge the 16 elements that are needed for plant growth. They all serve their purpose and their function whether it is building cell walls, regulating water loss by operating the stomata, the formation of chlorophyll for photosynthesis, it is all so well operated and interwoven like a machine.
Imagine if one of them were not present…
Even environments affect growth. Orchids grow in the roots of trees in the wild so we have to learn their growing styles. They don’t like growing in soils but enjoy having air around their roots. They don’t like full sunlight but enjoy a little shade. They don’t like to be really wet so they like their water in little amounts at a time.
Well, enough with plants, what about God’s intricate design in the human body? Amazing from even an amateurs understanding.
I don’t know much about the human body but one fact I found interesting was blood clotting. I found this page really interesting, although it is above my head and I could just understand the general idea of it:
http://www.doesgodexist.org/NovDec98/IrreducibleComplexityBloodClotting.html
Also you can read Behe’s response to “talk Origins” rebuttal here:
http://creationwiki.org/Blood_clotting_is_irreducibly_complex_(Talk.Origins)
I believe the bible leaves room for some evolution within its words, but I cannot yet take the leap of belief that is required for me to believe it happened on the large scale that full blown evolutionists accept it on (even when looking at some of the evidence for evolution).
The sentence that I thought stood out from the “doesgodexist” article was the following: “The engine of Darwinian evolution only works if there is something to select--something that is useful right now, not in the future.”
Makes sense to me.
I have fingers that are useful to me now but how would they be useful to me two millennia or so ago (who knows when) when they were stumps… or even a finger. How and why grow longer or more fingers? Did it evolution plan it? Surely not - that can’t happen except through premeditation by a higher power! At least, I think so. I can agree that in general the fittest survive, but how on earth (quite literally) do the fittest get to be the fittest accidentally? Not only in one area but in all areas eventually?! I know natural selection and random mutation attempts to answer this, and I know what they are and what they do, but it doesn’t quite equate for me.
Wow, what a fruit salad post, when reading it again.
Aaaaarrrrgggghh, opening a can of worms again. It’s been a while. Some may think I am ridiculous, but really, it goes both ways somehow. Lol.
What an amazing world we live in, one that I cannot comprehend developing without the premeditation of a Higher Power.
