Letter: With evoution, a need to 'learn to discern'
By Phil Drietz, Delhi As sequel to my April 5 letter on evolution, I would like to address the issue of "theistic evolution." This is when religious people of any belief or denomination hold that God used evolution to create life as we know it.As...
By Phil Drietz, Delhi
As sequel to my April 5 letter on evolution, I would like to address the issue of “theistic evolution.” This is when religious people of any belief or denomination hold that God used evolution to create life as we know it.
As one creationist author put it: “If evolution happened, then death was widespread before man evolved. But if death preceded man and was not a result of Adam’s sin, then sin is a fiction. If sin is a fiction, then we do not need a savior.” This seems logical enough if you are a follower of Christianity who is not afraid to let truth take the lead.
What is not logical is Christians believing in evolutionary processes and claiming God made those processes, when no evidence exists for the processes. How ironic, when self-professed atheists will say: “We don’t know very well how evolution works. Nor did Darwin, and nor as far as we can tell, does anybody else.” But then here comes religious leaders who claim “it’s OK to believe in evolution, just as long as you acknowledge that God created all living things. They might as well say: “It’s OK to believe that two plus two equals five, or the moon is made of blue cheese, just as long as you do not deny that God created the universe.” Giving credibility to evolution renders a great disfavor to youths who may be struggling with the current-day “reality issues.”
I can understand how seminaries may have felt pressured to render some credibility to evolutionists’ sophistry many years ago, but today there simply is no excuse with all the technological advances, i.e. imaging techniques giving resolutions down to just a few angstroms for observation of life’s extremely complex molecular machinery, genome editing, etc.
You don’t have to be a molecular biologist to figure out that the molecular systems of life which exceed the complexity of IBM and Microsoft’s computer languages and operating systems probably did not arise from a pile of dead chemicals without any intellectual input.
The same type of sophistry is still being used by certain segments of the scientific community today who try to make us believe life has been around for millions or billions of years when in reality the preponderance of science data tells us earth has only been around for thousands of years.
Anyone care to defend radiometric dating techniques of rocks i.e. zircon crystal encapsulation of radio-isotopes? Same sophistry techniques can apply for the man-made global warming myth supposedly caused by CO2 generation.
We need to make a reasonable effort to “learn to discern.”