May 11, 2006

Once More Into the Evolutionary Breach
Everett

My last post was going to be my last post on evolution, but in re-reading your last post, Farlas, I realized that though I had attempted to flesh out the underlying reason you rejected evolution, I had given no explanation as to why I think evolution to be true. It is possible to tease what I'll have to say here out of what I've written in my previous posts, but I haven't actually taken the time to set out where where I'm coming from. Based upon what I can only describe as your strange attribution of motive to me, it looks like this would be a useful thing to do.

Ultimately, my view on evolution and other theories that contradict a literal reading of Genesis' accounts of creation is grounded in my view of the purpose of science (I am unsing this term in the traditional sense to able to include theology, which used to be called the queen of the sciences.): to find the truth. The purpose of the natural sciences is to discover the natural order; the purpose of theology is to discover the nature of the supernatural and its interactions with nature. The Bible's primary value is theological as it shows God's interaction with creation, especially with man and shows how we might enter into communion with him. In other words, it shows what God has done and how we ought to respond to it. It is not a work of natural history. Therefore, it should not be taken as an absolute guide to the the development of the physical universe, though a symbolic reading of Genesis 1 can give you something very much like evolution.

But what of evolution? Well, given the above context, this is a question for the natural sciences to answer, and from what I have seen, the overwhelming majority of the evidence supports the theory of evolution. I accept evolution as true because that is where the facts have led me, and the more I learn, the more I am convinced this is the case. My acceptance of evolution is not based on some sort of need for control over God. Indeed, I can not imagine how evolution being true could possibly lead to me having more control over God.

Also, I apologize if I have imputed to you any views, beliefs or motivations which you do not in fact hold. In hindsight, I inferred too much from what you had written and on at least one occasion assumed your dismissal of evolution as junk science was made in bad faith as opposed to being based on an honest assessment of the facts in front of you. Dismissing an assertion on grounds of motivation is on the same level of offense as an ad hominem attack and only slightly better than knowingly making an argument based on a lie. There is no excuse for it, and I ask your forgiveness.

God bless,

Everett