My Sunday Thought for 070217: Creationism or Evolution?

“People cited violation of the First Amendment when a New Jersey schoolteacher asserted that evolution and the Big Bang are not scientific and that Noah's ark carried dinosaurs. This case is not about the need to separate church and state; it's about the need to separate ignorant, scientifically illiterate people from the ranks of teachers.”

-- Neil deGrasse Tyson, astrophysicist, author

Neil deGrasse Tyson had a hand in demoting Pluto from planetary status so, as much as I like him, he and I do not see eye to eye on at least that issue.  The problem is also getting bright, scientifically literate people into the ranks of teachers; specifically those who have the ability and desire to open their pea brains and accept there may be explanations outside of the narrow viewpoint of accepted scientific fact considering that scientific "fact" only exists until new acceptable facts present themselves.  Science is always right until it's proven wrong and, as with the practice of medicine, scientists always seem to be practicing their science.  Change is, after all, the only constant in the universe, Neil.  It might be best for us to remember the words of Socrates, "The only thing I know is that I know nothing, and I am not quite sure that I know that."

This definition, which applies only to the Solar System, states that a planet is a body that orbits the Sun, is massive enough for its own gravity to make it round, and has "cleared its neighbourhood" of smaller objects around its orbit. Under this new definition, Pluto and the other trans-Neptunian objects do not qualify as planets. The IAU's decision has not resolved all controversies, and while many scientists have accepted the definition, some in the astronomical community have rejected it outright.

-- Wikipedia, "Definition of Planet"

The International Astronomical Union (IAU) made a decision which not all astronomers accept, and this might be prudent when we consider astronomy's scorecard.  How can they make a statement, a definition, which "applies only to the Solar System" and nowhere else in the universe?  Is it just me, or does this seem a tad exclusive considering our assumptions concerning gravitational forces in the universe?

It would seem our distant ancestors had a better grasp on the heavens, without the use of computers and telescopes, than we do with all our modern crap.  We find ourselves constantly catching up, rediscovering what they already knew or took for granted, and proving their superior grasp all things nature.  Oh, and by the way, Neil, science is becoming confused by prehistoric paintings and carvings depicting man alongside dinosaurs.  Maybe we shouldn't be so quick to discount the Noah/dinosaur theory lest we, once again, look like "ignorant, scientifically illiterate people" instead of open minded scientist in search of truth.  Just saying.

Before you continue reading, you might like to review the following, one page article - Creationist Builds Life Sized Noah's Ark. It is another viewpoint, albeit out in left ‘interpretation’ field. An alternative interpretation which can get the juices of thought flowing, if parenting is strong enough to explain all sides of a controversy so a child can see the pros and cons of scientific fact versus conjecture (aka, faith). We all have our own determination of faith where the stories in Genesis, Revelation, and the Bible as a whole are concerned. Is it the WORD of God, or the words of man inspired by God?

"Well, opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one."

-- Dirty Harry, "The Dead Pool" (1988)

Parables, like those found in scripture, are simply easy to understand explanations for more complicated ideas and philosophies, like the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments, which are so simple even a mindless moron can understand them; do or do not, will or will not, are not the stuff of rocket science, yet we need parables to muddy the waters? I prefer to think of scripture as one history of the Abrahamic faiths. Archeologists and scholars are constantly proving, disproving, discovering the truths, fallacies, and misinterpretations of what has been handed down through the ages.

Perhaps the only error in Ken Ham’s thinking, as stated in the article, is putting a definitive age of the earth at 6000 years when science recently dated a Homo erectus skull to 1.6 million years. We also have some recent evidence of hominin tool use 250,000 years ago, or 50,000 years before man arrived in Africa. On top of all this is the scientific and written historical evidence from around the world of a worldwide flood occurring about 3000 BCE. If Mr. Ham has done anything, though, he has almost proved the engineering of Noah's Ark as possible. Now we just need a flood to put that particular controversy to bed.

Noah and the flood do nothing to prove the theories of creationism or evolution. To my way of thinking, why should either theory be wrong? Even if we concede that God created the heavens and the earth in six days, resting on the seventh, science has shown God created the earth 4 billion years ago, not 6000. So why are people reconsidering their faith in organized religion? Misinterpretation of bedtime stories is why most of us with inquiring minds are waiting for the Abrahamic faithful to explain why an omnipotent being would show weakness through a need to rest, or admire His work. It stands to reason what God created is good; He is, after all, omnipotent and perfect, right? So why did God have to step back and admire work that would obviously, and always, be perfect?

Most of us find it easy to accept, through faith or science, the obvious concept that an ultimate energy in the universe created everything. This energy existed then, is now, and forever shall be (world without end, amen!). Through this creation of everything, life evolved. Aha! So, God created all life and, by extension, mankind. The question posed by science and the yet to be discovered ancestor we humorously refer to as the "missing link," is how man jumped from knuckle dragging archaic humans into anatomically modern humans 200,000 years ago, especially if the Bible holds the age of the earth at 6000 years. Have faith? Faith is what we always fall back on when we don't have answers, when we just don't know but we have to say something to keep ourselves, and others, moving inexorably forward; when we simply have to believe... in something.

Then the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil."

-- Genesis 3:22

Behold, we have become like one of them, plural?  Since the faithful all want to believe that God makes no mistakes, let's travel out to left field, with Mr. Ham, and spitball a "what if" for a moment. 

What if, 200,000 years ago, the genetic structure of archaic humans was reengineered and improved by another race of beings that were also created by the ultimate energy we refer to as God?  Perhaps it began earlier than anyone might imagine, using our simian ancestors, and popping in and out for a visit to occasionally tweak the product.  What if we were part of some grand experiment to speed up our evolution and develop us into a purely righteous being, without knowledge of evil and for some greater purpose, and we failed their test by breaking the only rule we were given, to not eat from the Tree of Knowledge, to not know evil?  God would have still been at the root of our creation with an expectation of us evolving slowly from primordial slime into beings with the knowledge moral righteousness only time and experience can teach.  What if who we have come to think of as 'God' are actually superior creations of God who mucked with our genetic structure for some purpose known only to them?  Now, because of some mistake, we have been endowed with superior knowledge we were never intended to possess, and that knowledge drives us, as it did our creators, to also search out the forbidden knowledge of the Tree of Life so we can eat from it, as well, and live forever... as gods.

"You ever noticed how people who believe in Creationism look really unevolved? You ever noticed that? Eyes real close together, eyebrow ridges, big furry hands and feet. "I believe God created me in one day." Yeah, looks like He rushed it."

-- Bill Hicks (1961-1994), comedian, social critic, satirist

Knowing what we have learned about genetic engineering, the question might be why these superior beings didn't just create us using their own genetic material.  Well, "man has become like us, knowing of good and evil," might hold the answer.  Perhaps, their own genetic material was flawed.  They saw their own knowledge of evil as the barrier to their own perfection.  They may have discovered that, once you have tasted of the fruit, righteousness becomes a cloud which obscures true perfection.  Maybe, in their own way, they were searching, through us, for an alternate path to the perfection which they, also, envisioned our mutual creator to be.  They were searching for the knowledge which would allow them to crossover from their finite physical existence into the realm of the infinite by using genetically enhanced avatars as vehicles for their essence.  They might have been dying, and the illusion of time was becoming all too real, and it was running out.

“According to the Buddha's teaching the beginning of the life-stream of living beings is unthinkable. The believer in the creation of life by God may be astonished at this reply. But if you were to ask him 'What is the beginning of God?' he would answer without hesitation 'God has no beginning', and he is not astonished at his own reply.”

-- Walpola Rahula (1907-1997), Buddhist monk, scholar

Creationism or evolution?  Or, perhaps a bit of both?  Like these superior beings, we now find ourselves on the same mission, a mission to discover the one true God.  Not the 'god' who made a mistake and mucked up the great experiment, giving us the knowledge of our own universe, but, rather, the ultimate creative force and the knowledge of everything.  Whether we accept the concept of 'intervention' or simply have faith in God, like our 'creators' we search for the knowledge which will allow us to crossover into the realm of the infinite and finally become as gods, as one with the ultimate power  - our one, true, creator. 

This is all just my humble opinion from somewhere out in left field, My Sunday Thought, and, as usual, I could be wrong.  I hope you discover, buried somewhere throughout my rambling, food for your own thoughts.  Your constructive thoughts and opinions are the stuff which others might be interested in reading, so be sure to leave them in the form of constructive comments and email.  By constructive comments, I mean the use of language not, in the words of Mr. Spock, "currently laced with, shall we say, more colorful metaphors, 'double dumbass on you' and so forth."

“I approach the creation-evolution dispute not as a scientist but as a problem of law, which means among other things that I know something about the ways that words are used in arguments. What first drew my attention to the question was the way the rules of argument seemed to be structured to make it impossible to question whether what we are being told about evolution is really true. For example, the Academy's rule against negative argument automatically eliminates the possibility that science has not discovered how complex organisms could have developed. However wrong the current answer may be, it stands until a better answer arrives. It is as if a criminal defendant were not allowed to present an alibi unless he could also show who did commit the crime.”

Phillip E. Johnson, Darwin on Trial

Editor's Note 

(re: disclaimer cum "get out of jail free" card) 

Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider another viewpoint.

It is my fervent hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and then engaging in peaceful, constructive, discussion in an arena of mutual respect concerning the opinions put forth. After over twenty years with military intelligence, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.

We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human. God's test for us is what we learn from the experience, and what we do afterward.

Pastor Tony spent 23 years with United States Air Force Intelligence as a planner, analyst, briefer, instructor, and senior manager. He spent 17 years, following his service career, working with an Institutional Review Board helping to protect the rights of human subjects in pharmaceutical research. Ordained 1n 2013 as an "interfaith" minister, he founded the Congregation for Religious Tolerance in response to intolerance shown by Christians toward peaceful Islam. As the weapon for his war on intolerance he chose the pen, to wage his "battle" in the guise of the Congregation's official online blog, The Path, of which he is both author and editor. "The Path" offers a vehicle for commentary and guidance concerning one's own personal, spiritual, path toward peace and the final destination for us all. He currently resides in Pass Christian, Mississippi, where he volunteers as Chaplain Program Liaison, at a regional medical center.