When it comes to design I think that there are too many chance occurrences that direct the development and flow of our lives to say that everything is set in "order" and "God ordained." Obviously, everything that happens will happen within the domain of God's allowance or forbearance, but do you really think Peyton Manning's 6 interceptions were "the will of God?" Or did the San Diego defense have any say in the matter, or the sloppy field?
That's where I use the "casino analogy." Every game in a casino, by law, must have a random outcome. Nobody knows what's going to happen until the dice are rolled, the lever is pulled or the wheel is spun. However the one thing that you can count on is that at the end of the day, the casino is going to make a bank deposit.
All of the random events in each game is funneled through mathematical filters so that the house always wins. Also, the nature of the game itself determines the outcome. Holding the dice in your hand, you know that the outcome will be random. However it's not so random that you'll roll a 14. The shape and number of the dice determines that you must roll some combination between 2 and 12. Given the six sided nature of the cube, the most likely outcome is 7, so all of the dice games are built around the number 7 in such a way as to make certain that the odds are always in the house's favor.
In his book Vital Dust, Christian De Duve shows how that the nature of the carbon atom is such, that given the right environment, it will begin to "automatically" form more complex molecules. Given the right circumstances further, and some "chance" events, the complex carbon based molecules will become self replicating. This is why he calls life an "imperative." Given the right environment life will "just happen" in a lengthy series of "chance" encounters. But the outcome of those "chance" encounters between molecules and atoms are filtered by the very nature of the atoms themselves. It's almost as if "someone" "designed" the atoms to self assemble into living organisms. However, that "someone" (or some One) planned it so that the likely environment would be so excruciatingly rare that for all intents and purposes, life is limited to a single environment.
On the subject of design: Have you heard the "mud puddle or pothole argument?"
Look at the shape of a pothole and then imagine lifting the water out of the pothole. Notice how that the pothole appears to have been designed just to hold that exact shape of water?
Of course what we really see is that the water conforms its shape to the available environment - the shape of the prexisting pothole.
Life is like water in that its shapes and forms are adaptable to the environment in which they find themselves. When Europeans first landed on Australia they found a continent with marsupials instead of placental mammals. Yet the marsupials had evolved into biological niches similar to the "shape" of corresponding niches on other continents. The kangaroo was the savannah grazing animal. It had even evolved the facial characteristics and long ears of deer and antelope elswhere. Other animals were named for their mammilian counterparts, the wolf or tiger and so forth.
This adaptability is responsible for the "appearance of design." I accept a fundamental principle that "design" is involved at a very high level in the cosmos. However, I've been disappointed with the Intelligent Design" movement in general. The appraoch that seems to withstand the withering attacks of the anti-religiouys crowd is when we look for purpose and meaning.
Life is malleable. Those lifeforms that are most malleable to changing environments are often the survivors. There is perhaps a lesson to be learned here.
On the subject of death before Adam:
Many YECs insist that based upon Romans 5:12-14 and 1 Corinthians 15:21-22, that there was no "death" before Adam. They used to say "No Death" and meant just that. Over the last several years however, many have adapted (like water in a pothole) their teaching and now say things like, "Plants are not alive" and so forth. How a kernel of wheat falls into the ground and "dies" (John 12:24) is apparently not a question that troubles these guys.
1. By Adam all die.
2. By Jesus Christ all are made alive.
To follow the "all" to the conclusion that animals die because of Adam, then we must assume that all animals will be resurrected because of Jesus Christ. I guess the cartoon was really correct: All dogs do go to Heaven!
I can't help but conclude that if the YEC's "death argument" is true, then Jesus Christ died not only for "the elect," and not only "for all men;" but He died for the bacteria, plants, animals and evrything else that has ever been alive on this planet. That takes universalism to an extreme that would offend even most universalists. Crakjak will need to ammend his sig line to include anaerobes!
The fact remains, that the "death" that Romans 5 discusses came into the world by one man and was passed upon all men because all have sinned. The Scripture never tells us that animals have sinned (neither plants or bacteria), but that men have sinned. The death that was passed on by Adam's sin involved the descendants of Adam and not the other biological organisms on the planet.
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned."
We are talking about Adam and his descendants dying here. The idea of a "Spiritual death" or seperation from God is obvious. The idea of physical death may be intended as well, but only for Adam and his descendants.
The world was full of death and dying before Adam. It's just that this death is a part of the natural world. The natural world is obviously important- it's where we live. But the discussion of sin and death that was passed upon "all men" (Greek: anthropos = humans) involves the supernatural as well.
The consequences of sin in the natural world might be that the sinner lives and the saint is killed. This happens all the time and we call it "injustice." However, there is no natural remedy for injustice. We need a supernatural remedy. The same with the stain of sin that each of us bears. There is no natural cure for this. We need a supernatural one.
The fact that the bigger fish eats the smaller fish isn't a consequence of Adam's sin. The fish were not the descendants of Adam. The same holds true for all of the natural deaths in the world, then and now. Paul was concerned only with a discussion of death and sin involving Adam and his descendants.
I disagree with the YEC's, yet scripture does indicate that the "whole" creation will be redeemed. The scripture also is a record of "man" and his relationship and his preception of his relationship with God. I have changed my sig but not for that reasoning.
__________________ For it is written, "As I live, says the Lord every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall give praise to God. (Romans 14:11- NASB)
I agree with your thoughts on non-human death prior to "the fall." A simple glance at the great white shark should help convince someone that things died prior the fall. I apologize for not going into more detail in my original post. My concern is geared toward the death of "humans." What makes a human death different than other creations of God? I believe we should look to the soul for the answer. And man became a living soul (Gen 2:7). Since I don't give this soul attribute to plant and animal life I see the death of man differently than I would the victim of the great white or even the death of a piece of fruit and/or other plant life when consumed. The separation of man's soul from the physical body and from God himself is of far more interest to me than victims of the food chain.
I also thank you for your thoughts on the pothole and agree that purpose and meaning is a strong approach. One could ask whether your pothole was purposefully designed to form its contents in a preconceived fashion. Was the environment (the pothole) purposefully formed?
I'm guessing you refer to the botanical record as well when you mention adaptation to the environment, but I have to wonder whether things are adapting to the environment or whether the environment was simply purposely fine tuned in order to house a wide variation of wonderful life. Whichever the case may be, I still see something like the seed dispersal systems of some plantlife as seen in examples here and stand in awe.
I'm also reminded of some amusing thoughts my childhood pastor had concerning fruits and veggies. He would say how wonderful it was that God made fruits and veggies in such convenient individual proportions... just the right size for a good snack..... and he wrapped them to boot! I guess he'd say God meant for us to be sociable .... that's why he made watermelons!
I'll be out of town for a few days teaching a defense seminar down in Ohio. I'd like to revisit this when I return if I find the opportunity. I enjoy your posts. God bless.
I have a few comments and questions for you. How do you observe biological evolution?
Survival of the fittest as I understand it has to do with whatever adaptations develop that enable a creature to adapt and survive in its environment. Modification is another word for adapting to your environment like the color of the brown beetle that helped it to survive over the green beetle because it's not eaten when the leaves are not green due to lack of rain. Yet a beetle always reproduces after its kind though there may develop a variety within the same species.
I was limiting miracles to the supernatural. Like God keeping the sun from going down for Joshua, changing water to wine, calming a storm with a verbal command. I think the theory of evolution inhibits folks from believing in the miraculous and supernatural because they look at things from a materialistic/naturalist point of view. I don't see how it can promote theism because it seems to say from the point of a deist that God got creation started with a bang of some sort then sat back and watched the events unfold. Is this what you believe?
How do you know there was death and dying before Adam? What about this verse? For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. Rom 8: 22
__________________
His banner over me is LOVE.... My soul followeth hard after thee....Love one another with a pure heart fervently. Jesus saith unto her, Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?
To be a servant of God, it will cost us our total commitment to God, and God alone. His burden must be our burden... Sis Alvear
I have a few comments and questions for you. How do you observe biological evolution?
By observing the fact that I am not a genetic clone of my parents. Biological Evolution is simply descent with modification.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
Survival of the fittest as I understand it has to do with whatever adaptations develop that enable a creature to adapt and survive in its environment. Modification is another word for adapting to your environment like the color of the brown beetle that helped it to survive over the green beetle because it's not eaten when the leaves are not green due to lack of rain. Yet a beetle always reproduces after its kind though there may develop a variety within the same species.
To get speciation to occur you need geographic isolation over a period of many generations. An example of this would be the "New World monkeys" and the "Old World monkeys and apes." As the Americas were split from Africa and Europe (beginning a little over 200 million years ago) the ancestors of one group were isolated from the ancestors of the other group. Thus two separate lineages developed where eventually the members of one group could no longer viably breed with the members of the other group.
We can see similar cases but where the split is presently incomplete. The donkey and horse will breed, however the offspring are almost always infertile mules.
Another example is the gull genus Larus. L. argentatus and L. fuscus which were originally identified as distinct species in England. However, there is a continuous ring of Larus hybrids extending to the east and west all the way round the North Pole. Only in England are they incapable of interbreeding.
This is "evolution in action." As populations of the organism become more isolated for more generations, they "speciate." We can even see this in the fossil record among extinct species like the dinosaurs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
I was limiting miracles to the supernatural. Like God keeping the sun from going down for Joshua, changing water to wine, calming a storm with a verbal command.
And I may have gone off on a tangent with the "special" meaning for miracle like birth and life in general. But for me, life defies such odds that it is rather miraculous. Look at how huge the universe is, and how small the niche where we find life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
I think the theory of evolution inhibits folks from believing in the miraculous and supernatural because they look at things from a materialistic/naturalist point of view.
The purpose of the theory of evolution has never been to "promote theism." It has been a journey to understand the natural history of Earth. Because of its focus on natural history, the elements of the supernatural are purposefully ignored. Remember, the Scientific Revolution started, at least in part, as a reaction against theism gone mad. Like I said before, many proponents of science are really burned out on religion and theism - and for very good reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
I don't see how it can promote theism because it seems to say from the point of a deist that God got creation started with a bang of some sort then sat back and watched the events unfold.
Again, the purpose of any science is not to "promote theism." Science does not promote anything in particular at all, except more questions. And that's the beauty of science. When we try to use science to promote our theology or personal philosophies, we corrupt the scientific method by attaching a lot of preconceived notions to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
Is this what you believe?
I'm afraid that I have no pithy belief statement formulated at the present time. However, my several posts on Logos Theology would seem to preclude deism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
How do you know there was death and dying before Adam?
Because of things like this. Notice the "fish within a fish." This specimen was found in a layer of Cretaceous rocks. There has never been any evidence of man in Cretaceous rocks. However we find a lot of human activity millions of years later. Therefore, I conclude that these fish died before human beings, and before the progenitor of the human race (Adam) ever lived.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
What about this verse? For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. Rom 8: 22
In its context, Paul is talking about the suffering we have in this present day. There does appear to be a broader context as well. Do you think this implies that Adam's sin introduced all death into the world as well as the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics?
So, does the prebiotic soup position propose that man is related to his shrubs? Plant life and man from the same initial building blocks of life?
Would the giant carrot-man on one of the old Lost in Space episodes be evidence of transition? Then again, I have seen a few cauliflower ears in my time.
Another thought on this subject is that if Adam had to name all of the animals, and if the millions and millions of species that exist today, existed in the Garden of Eden... how long did it take him?
Or is this another of those bible stories that doesn't have biblical backing?
Another thought on this subject is that if Adam had to name all of the animals, and if the millions and millions of species that exist today, existed in the Garden of Eden... how long did it take him?
Or is this another of those bible stories that doesn't have biblical backing?
Well, there are those who say he did name all the animals (in the garden anyways) AND became lonely to the point that God put him to sleep and created Eve -all within a 12 hour period. Within 24 hours if he was created at 12:01 am and Eve was made by 11:59 PM that same day.
So, does the prebiotic soup position propose that man is related to his shrubs? Plant life and man from the same initial building blocks of life?
Would the giant carrot-man on one of the old Lost in Space episodes be evidence of transition? Then again, I have seen a few cauliflower ears in my time.
Just about all life on the planet appears to have a common descent. There are some really exotic bacteria that may have arisen separately. But yes, animals and plants, though very different in many ways, make the same set of protiens from the same type of blue prints. And there really are a lot of species that fall into that sort of hazy gray area in between. The evolutionary model predicts this.
I'm afraid I have never seen the Carrot Men you mention.
The problem with nailing down the actual "prebiotic soup" recipe is that we don't know enough about the early chemical conditions of the earth. And life could have arisen a number of ways, so we presently have several competing theories. But we see a lot of chemicals that exist in nature, that are self replicating and yet they are quite "alive." Prions and viruses are a couple of examples.
My soul followeth hard after thee....Love one another with a pure heart fervently. 
Linear Mode
