The Genealogy of Nastalgia.
I haven't written here in awhile, I know, but I just got on facebook and starting writing and soon my writing became rambling and my rambling got longer so I decided to post it. After posting it I decided that I should copy it here. So, here it is. Maybe it's controversial, but I feel as though I am attempting to avoid the controversy. So, OK.
Please believe me when I say that these words are my own (except for the quotations of course) please don't take them.
Stick with me, it takes me a second to get to the point, but it's there I promise.
Charles Darwin collected data for five years and studied it for over twenty before publishing a theory that seemed to (for whatever reason) strike at the very core of the Judeo-Christian faith. I am reminded of Galileo's highly controversial "Round-Earth Theory" that if proven true could have possibly destroyed the very foundation of the Hebrew Bible. Right.
What Darwin (an esteemed theologian) found, in spending so many years studying his findings, was evidence that each population's environment put pressure on the population as a whole and pushed them to different means of survival thus changing species within themselves and also outside of themselves (For it is astonishing to me that there are some who believe in a type of "micro"-evolution and disregard "macro"-evolution, since evolution is simply change over time whether it is a small (micro) amount of time or a large (macro) amount of time.) It is important to note that the theory of evolution (even now, just a theory) had been around for centuries before Darwin. Aristotle called it "descent with modification". So, Darwin was well aware of the concept of evolution and he (as a minister) rejected it probably as much as you are rejecting my statements here now. This is probably why it took him over twenty years to believe what it is that he saw.
So, back to this concept of environmental pressure. I believe Darwin would agree that in a sense the environment "pushes" species to change (obviously not consciously but through natural change in climates, etc...).
"And the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters." Genesis 1:2
As I continue, in case I forget, please note how often water is mentioned in the creation of the world and of man in the world as this directly parallels thinkers from Anaximander to Darwin who believe that life began in the water. So, here we are with a world that has no perceivable structure, a world that would first of all have to change physically as the picture painted here resembles very little the world we see today. So as God is working (in whatever way) over the surface of the water, the physical makeup of this planet must have begun to change (as it still is). And the environmental pressures that Darwin was researching become more and more evident in scripture.
"Then God said, "Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures"...God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind" Genesis 1:20-21
Again, this parallels with evolutionary thought more than I expected it to when I began to research Biblical "defenses" to the "attack" of evolutionists. Watch the progression.
"Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so. God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good." Genesis 1:24-25
Remember that during this time the earth was changing drastically from how it was described in earlier scriptures to the way we see it now. The environmental pressures, as Darwin described them would have been in full-force.
"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." Genesis 1:26
Literary evidence shows that there is no question that SOMETHING happened six thousand years ago. Biologists agree that man is the most complex organism on the planet and that life started in the water, moved to the ground and air, and has eventually ended up at man around six thousand years ago. This account is also what I see in Genesis. (Biblical Genealogical tracts will show that the first man was born roughly six thousand years ago) Adam and Eve were obviously the first husband and first wife that were created by God. Whether or not they were the first man and first woman is (in my mind) debatable, however I firmly believe that in man's tenure inside the Garden there were plenty of men living outside the Garden. For during the creation of the world, God creates man, and after "the heavens and earth were completed, and all their hosts" God then sets off to create Adam from dust and breathes in him life (possibly our conscious, reason, etc...)
Now, I do not believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that God used evolution to create man and all the species in their form. However, I do believe that I do not know how we were created. In the same way, if it could be proven (as has been tried over and over) that a large wind and general low water levels is what parted the Red Sea for Moses, that (for me) would not challenge whether or not that was a miracle performed by God. In the same way that some astronomists have shown that on November 12, 7 BC that the stars lined up in a way to represent the traditional Star of Bethlehem, either trying proving that the Star itself was not a miracle or that Jesus was not born on December 25. Neither of those propositions would challenge my faith, just as if it could be proven that God created man by evolution through natural selection. The Bible says nothing (in my findings, interpretations, etc...) that would disprove evolution and evolution, for a fact, says nothing about the existence or nonexistance of God. For its part, evolution does not even try to explain where the first single-celled organism came from. There is and probably always will be an (unfortunate) conflict between science and religion. As far as Christianity goes, science could exist separate from Christianity with little to no conflict if so allowed. Not through apathy or ignorance, but because they rarely (if ever) touch on the same subjects. It would be like saying knowledge of Mathematics challenges my believe in God, when knowledge of Mathematics has nothing to do with the existance or nonexistance of God (unless of course you want to say that God gives us the the ability to comprehend mathematics, then he must do the same with science). This ongoing conflict between Christians and scientists has done nothing except make the entire Christian community seem ignorant and stubborn. This has turned off those who seek truth if they feel they must abandon such a quest in order to believe in God. This is unfortunate since the quest for truth is nothing but enhanced through faith.
You don't have to believe in evolution; the main point, the point that I hope to get across, is the relationship between Christianity and science. Maybe you'll think about that relationship differently and either seek to embrace Christianity or embrace science more than in the past.
Please believe me when I say that these words are my own (except for the quotations of course) please don't take them.
Stick with me, it takes me a second to get to the point, but it's there I promise.
Charles Darwin collected data for five years and studied it for over twenty before publishing a theory that seemed to (for whatever reason) strike at the very core of the Judeo-Christian faith. I am reminded of Galileo's highly controversial "Round-Earth Theory" that if proven true could have possibly destroyed the very foundation of the Hebrew Bible. Right.
What Darwin (an esteemed theologian) found, in spending so many years studying his findings, was evidence that each population's environment put pressure on the population as a whole and pushed them to different means of survival thus changing species within themselves and also outside of themselves (For it is astonishing to me that there are some who believe in a type of "micro"-evolution and disregard "macro"-evolution, since evolution is simply change over time whether it is a small (micro) amount of time or a large (macro) amount of time.) It is important to note that the theory of evolution (even now, just a theory) had been around for centuries before Darwin. Aristotle called it "descent with modification". So, Darwin was well aware of the concept of evolution and he (as a minister) rejected it probably as much as you are rejecting my statements here now. This is probably why it took him over twenty years to believe what it is that he saw.
So, back to this concept of environmental pressure. I believe Darwin would agree that in a sense the environment "pushes" species to change (obviously not consciously but through natural change in climates, etc...).
"And the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters." Genesis 1:2
As I continue, in case I forget, please note how often water is mentioned in the creation of the world and of man in the world as this directly parallels thinkers from Anaximander to Darwin who believe that life began in the water. So, here we are with a world that has no perceivable structure, a world that would first of all have to change physically as the picture painted here resembles very little the world we see today. So as God is working (in whatever way) over the surface of the water, the physical makeup of this planet must have begun to change (as it still is). And the environmental pressures that Darwin was researching become more and more evident in scripture.
"Then God said, "Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures"...God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind" Genesis 1:20-21
Again, this parallels with evolutionary thought more than I expected it to when I began to research Biblical "defenses" to the "attack" of evolutionists. Watch the progression.
"Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so. God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good." Genesis 1:24-25
Remember that during this time the earth was changing drastically from how it was described in earlier scriptures to the way we see it now. The environmental pressures, as Darwin described them would have been in full-force.
"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." Genesis 1:26
Literary evidence shows that there is no question that SOMETHING happened six thousand years ago. Biologists agree that man is the most complex organism on the planet and that life started in the water, moved to the ground and air, and has eventually ended up at man around six thousand years ago. This account is also what I see in Genesis. (Biblical Genealogical tracts will show that the first man was born roughly six thousand years ago) Adam and Eve were obviously the first husband and first wife that were created by God. Whether or not they were the first man and first woman is (in my mind) debatable, however I firmly believe that in man's tenure inside the Garden there were plenty of men living outside the Garden. For during the creation of the world, God creates man, and after "the heavens and earth were completed, and all their hosts" God then sets off to create Adam from dust and breathes in him life (possibly our conscious, reason, etc...)
Now, I do not believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that God used evolution to create man and all the species in their form. However, I do believe that I do not know how we were created. In the same way, if it could be proven (as has been tried over and over) that a large wind and general low water levels is what parted the Red Sea for Moses, that (for me) would not challenge whether or not that was a miracle performed by God. In the same way that some astronomists have shown that on November 12, 7 BC that the stars lined up in a way to represent the traditional Star of Bethlehem, either trying proving that the Star itself was not a miracle or that Jesus was not born on December 25. Neither of those propositions would challenge my faith, just as if it could be proven that God created man by evolution through natural selection. The Bible says nothing (in my findings, interpretations, etc...) that would disprove evolution and evolution, for a fact, says nothing about the existence or nonexistance of God. For its part, evolution does not even try to explain where the first single-celled organism came from. There is and probably always will be an (unfortunate) conflict between science and religion. As far as Christianity goes, science could exist separate from Christianity with little to no conflict if so allowed. Not through apathy or ignorance, but because they rarely (if ever) touch on the same subjects. It would be like saying knowledge of Mathematics challenges my believe in God, when knowledge of Mathematics has nothing to do with the existance or nonexistance of God (unless of course you want to say that God gives us the the ability to comprehend mathematics, then he must do the same with science). This ongoing conflict between Christians and scientists has done nothing except make the entire Christian community seem ignorant and stubborn. This has turned off those who seek truth if they feel they must abandon such a quest in order to believe in God. This is unfortunate since the quest for truth is nothing but enhanced through faith.
You don't have to believe in evolution; the main point, the point that I hope to get across, is the relationship between Christianity and science. Maybe you'll think about that relationship differently and either seek to embrace Christianity or embrace science more than in the past.