STUDY. Creationism & Intelligent Design versus Evolutionary Synthesis & Evolutionists. By Fabian Massa.
A. Five scientific arguments refuting evolutionary theory and Modern Evolutionary Synthesis.
B. Evolution and Creationism evolutionary deist .
2 . Evolutionary Creationism
C. Intelligent Design
From the study it is clear that there are two extreme positions :
a. Historic Creationism or Intelligent Design remake , where you take the Bible literally.
b . The Theory of Evolution or Evolutionary Synthesis agiornada where God has no place nor the stories of Biblical Creation .
And also intermediate positions to accept the existence of God as Creator, who has ignored some processes in nature, left a bit random evolution of his creatures. In these groups ( most markedly among Catholics ) the biblical accounts of creation are simply allegorical .
a. Evolutionary Theism
b . Evolutionary Creationism
Personally I reject the two extreme positions , because both sides are closed and do nothing to disqualify each other .
The intermediate positions have their strengths and weaknesses . You definitely can not accept the Catholic position Evolutionary Theism , because it contradicts itself : It's like wanting to be at peace with God and with the devil.
Evolutionary Creationism tries to reconcile both sides, but neither gets imposed.
It is a difficult issue because to reach a conclusion to be investigated on highly technical and scientific . We agree that not all people have the desire ( or the tools or proper training ) to study these issues in depth . And most importantly, there are things that people must determine by faith , decided to believe , whether or not a scientific argument , whether or not evidence.
Evolutionists think they're intellectuals and brain , but bear -human faith to believe that a " primordial soup " [ 17 ] [ 14 ] "which produced the first carbon compounds ( organic chemistry base ) that formed the "bricks " essential for the emergence of life on the planet ( amino acids, proteins , nucleic acids , etc. . ) . While it is entirely feasible the emergence of organic chemicals as described in special conditions , such as those assumed in the Earth were in their early geological times [ 18 ] , this does not explain or imply that a chemical based carbon skips to the mysterious and complex phenomenon of life .
Skip to study a very interesting laboratory experiment to conceive chemical reactions can leave a living requires an infinite capacity to believe : The Evolutionary Synthesis argue that these organic compounds were arranged randomly , and resulted in a first living cell , which then left multiplying . The cells were organized to form a first multicellular animal , which was playing and was eventually giving rise to a variety of animals and which descend all current . All processes have given at random ( without an order or direction, pure trial and error ) . Furthermore, in the event that this were so, the time that the Evolutionists give for the process ( about 4,000 million years ago) , could be few to achieve biodiversity complex there today on the planet through a process of trial and error. Wonderful, you have to have a lot of faith to believe this theory ! .
However reject the theory of evolution or evolutionary synthesis involves not reject all scientific research , in fact scientific disciplines has made important contributions to evidence confirming the veracity of the Bible [ 19 ] .Moreover, the arguments of the Creationists Orthodox , which in some cases are very valid , for example :
Objections to Evolutionary Synthesis - Groups historical or Orthodox Christian creationists [ 20 ]
1. There is no evidence that pre - biotic soup existed, and assuming it existed, yet no mechanisms to support the chemical evolution of life.
Two . No fossils exist transitive trillion only missing links in both realms , both animal and vegetable .
Three . The sudden appearance of complex life forms (not ancestors) in the deeper layers of the crust.
April . There is no evidence that inert matter can be transformed into living matter through through " natural processes " .
There are no mechanisms or explanations valid for any of the processes by which it is thought that evolution has occurred . Synthesis .
While these arguments are valid as criticism, Creationists usually do not provide an alternative that can be verified and so are rejected by the scientific community .
Among the things that produce more rejection of orthodox creationism stance ( even Christian sectors ) have basically four points :
1. The fact that criticize scientific methods (basically the issue of the dating of fossils and geological events ) but do not propose any system that improves the measurements.
2. Taking some passages literally and denial of real concrete elements such as fossils , archaeological evidence , geological evidence , etc. .
3. Seeing as only certain " interpretation " of Scripture .
4. The want to impose biblical stories , which is possible only believe them by faith.
Basically the problem of the "times " for historical creationists is that considered literally six days of the first story of Creation :
First Story , Genesis 1.1 to 1.31 : The first chapter of Genesis tells us the reality of an absolute beginning , "before Principle [ 21 ]" God and was ( The pre-existence of God [ 22 ] ) and He is the creator of " the Heavens and the Earth " is all that a man can see . This narrative covers a period of seven days , the Hebrew word for day is YOM . This word , as scholars in the language provided it is preceded by an adjective or ordinal numeral , should be translated as twenty four hour day . This concept is based more conservative denominations to take the concept literally twenty-four hours seven days ( the week of Creation) , an example of this is the biblical commentary on this verse of Jamieson , Fausset & Brown , which clarifies that , according to the definition for Strong 3117 YOM = DAY, is Hebrew means NIGHT HEAT while winding , since it involves all things. This implied that the phrase the DAY and NIGHT involve a succession followed HEAT LIGHT - DARK - NIGHT , which the authors associated with the cycle NIGHT - DAY [ 23 ] . Jamieson - Fausset - Brown argue that either the sun has been created before or at the same time the earth , it would have been darkened because of the existence of atmospheric vapors and mists that surrounded the planet's surface , which mandated dissipated God to give light. Moreover, if we consider that the sun was created on the fourth day , could be established parallels between Gen. 1.3 light with emanating directly from God in Revelation 22.5. According to a less conservative , the "Days of Creation " should be taken as alternating periods of light and darkness of indeterminate duration of time [ 24 ] . With respect to the times of Gen. 1 Dr. Esteban Voth , says: " It is interesting to note that when the Hebrew text mentions the number of each day does so without the definite article . In other words it does not say on the first day but a one day " [ 25 ] So, according to this line of thought, God began his creative work the first day and last indefinitely , in other re-created second day following. So although we have had seven days of creative work that week would fall within an indeterminate period of time.
Introduction, Genesis 1.1 -2: 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth . 2 And the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep , and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. In this story it presents God as the Creator of all the universe . The beginning of verse 1 "In the beginning " gives the name to the section of the Torah between Gen.1.1 and 6.8 (Be Reshit [ 26 ] ) . Is passage serves as an introduction to the first account of Creation. The Hebrew verb bara create in [ 27 ] and has only God as subject executor [28 ] . And void ( tohu va Bohu [ 29 ] ) Some scholars argue between verse 1 and 2 there was a wide range of time , during which some kind of event caused chaos in the perfect creation of God. The NIV Archaeological says that according to the Hebrew syntax rejects this view [ 30 ] , with respect to this theologian Felix Garcia Lopez in his book The Pentateuch [ 31 ] " says: " The introduction (v. 1-2 ) highlights the chaotic situation before beginning the creative work itself . " Among the peoples of the East is widely believed that before Creation was all a Great Chaos , the Word of God creates and brings order and meaning to things [ 32 ] . ... And darkness was upon the face of the deep [ 33 ] . Darkness is the translation of kjoshek [ 34 ], which means sinister darkness . According to Esteban Voth , in this context the two words associated express evil that opposes or endangers the life [ 35 ] .
My position is simple , God created the heavens and the earth ( Gen. 1.1 ), ie , everything. Before our three-dimensional universe , all that existed was him all things were created by God through His Word ( John 1:3 ) , which is to say that there was no material before him believed that he seems a truism but it is the same as holding the Big Bang theory , that before the universe is , there was nothing material Obviously the theory in question does not speak of God because he refuses, but agrees with the Bible in that there was a principle of the matter in space - time of our universe today . The theme of the times , and what the preacher said : " Everything has its time under the sun " (Ecclesiastes 3.11 ) is, in our material reality.
Paul says in his Letter to the Romans:
19 since what may be known about God is plain to them , because God has shown it . 20 For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes , namely , his eternal power and divine nature , have been clearly perceived through what has been made , so that men are without excuse . Ro . 1.19 - 20 NIV .
In what is clearly perceived that creation was a process that has taken time and that is written in the world, for example in the Grand Canyon , in the great mountain ranges . They have also been scarred as meteorite craters with ages far exceed 6,000 years. They have been fossil evidence are undeniable. Wanting to compress the time to make them fit on a literal interpretation does not seem reasonable and not even a matter of faith .
In my view, with this kind of attitude closed, it is much more the number of people away from the things of God that we cuddle . Orthodox Creationists are perceived by some sectors of Christianity itself as a proud and sectarian group . His underlying message could be summarized as : "We ( the Creationists Orthodox) understood the truth of Scripture through the only correct interpretation , we have the Holy Spirit and fire everyone who does not think like us ....... we will pray for you to also be saved "