REPLY #33 TO
"EVOLUTION VS. CREATIONISM"
are parts of the original essay (or a subsequent reply) to which the respondent has directed his comments.
prefaced by (R) are those of the respondent and are presented unedited.
My replies appear under the respondent's comments in blue text
and are prefaced by my initials (MB)
(R) I've been reading some of your debates - they're intriguing. But I'm always amazed how the "Creationists" seem to have a total lack of understanding when it comes to the "scientific method".
(MB) Unfortunately, that goes with the territory. If they actually did understand the methods, theories and evidence of science, they wouldn't and couldn't continue to adhere to their Creationist views.
(R) I'm a little different because I am both a person of faith (a Protestant Christian, to be precise - a prescribed label, I know, but I really just consider myself to be a spiritual believer in God) and, at the same time, an embracer of the scientific method and the theory of evolution. I have NO PROBLEM accepting both
(MB) This is actually how the majority of believers and denominations feel about this issue. They realize that science, in general, and evolution, in particular, are not things which are completely incompatible with religious belief. The small minority of believers who are Fundamentalist in their beliefs and who adhere strictly and strongly to Creationism are the sole exceptions.
Unfortunately, they make a lot of noise, are reasonably well-organized, and
wield disproportionate amounts of influence among the scientifically-illiterate
masses, so they must be dealt with and be given more attention than their silly
ideas would otherwise merit.
(R) I believe that the Bible is an historical representation of how things happen from a Judeo-Christian perspective - through stories of how man's relationship with God
(MB) Again, this is the majority view and one that is quite reasonable even to those of us who are not Christians. Unfortunately, the Creationists try to uphold the Bible as an infallible source of scientific fact and universal
history. Despite the fact that their views are easily proven to be false, they
will not give up their cause. It's difficult to see how their actions can do
anything but hurt the religion that they are trying to support.
(R) The WAY God makes things happen is through the physical laws of nature that He has established. Over the years, the wonderful, computer like brain God built (evolved) for us has been able to begin to decipher some of his methods. (If we can begin to understand the mechanics of God's brain i.e. nature, physics, genetics, evolution, etc. than we were definitely created in his image.). I think evolution is one of those methods and the facts accumulated so far support this.
(MB) While I, personally, would have my doubts about the role of God, the fact remains that evolutionary theory does not explicitly reject the possibility that it might be a tool of God's creation. Evolutionary theory is not something which deals with the question of ultimate origins. Therefore, there is plenty of room for those who believe in God (or in any other supreme deity, for that
matter) to say that evolution is one of his tools. In fact, I think that it
would be unreasonable for any believer to *not* hold such a view.
(R) Do you think it is strange (or that I'm strange) because I believe that the creationism story is valid and that evolution is just a process utilized therein?
(MB) I don't think that it is unreasonable at all for a believer to also accept evolution. As I've already said, I think it would be unreasonable for them *not* to accept it. Even if they do not wish to include Man within the workings
of evolution, the process would still hold for all other species and would
present no problems with their belief in God.
Therefore, even though I do not personally believe in God, I do not find it strange, unusual, or even contradictory for a believer to also accept evolution as a fact.