Monday, May 28, 2007

Origins of Life on Earth (Part 10)

Although I am far from done discussing evolution, I will move on in my attempt to prove the existence of a divine Creator of the universe. One of the theories of the origins of life on Earth is that aliens dropped off living creatures then left. But where did those aliens come from, if that is in fact true? The best guess for the origin of the universe as of yet is the Big Bang theory. I have no objection to such a theory and current physical science points in this direction. No living being could have come out of the initial explosion though. This means there must have been a point in time when the universe was completely uninhabited by any temporal life what so ever. There must have been some point then when non living matter changed into living matter. This is a defining and singular point in time, meaning at one instant there was no life and at the next moment there was. When was that time and what happened?

It is fair to assume that Earth is a perfect model of the universe in this regard and that we are the most advanced living being in the universe, so we can ignore any such theory about alien origins of life on Earth. This is not to just flippantly disregarding any such theory, only saying that if it is true that we have our origins in some other part of the universe, something had to happen in that other place similar to what we are supposing what happened on Earth. Life had to start somewhere and we might as well use Earth as the cradle of life in the universe.

One theory about evolution is that change happens radically and in short order. This speaks more of creation than evolution because DNA will not support a theory about squirrels rapidly changing into raccoons. DNA only supports theories about squirrels changing into different kinds of squirrels. One of the silliest things I ever heard is that one day we were monkeys and a few millions years later we were men. First of all monkeys are perfectly suited for what ever environment they will be in. People need clothes to survive but animals do not. What change could ever happen to make animals not need fur only to need it again later?

4 comments:

Belladonna said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Belladonna said...

Ok - Let's try this again.

I wish blogger would let me simply EDIT a comment rather than having to delete and start over completely.

I was originally thinking you were writing from an Orthodox perspective...mainly because many of the blogs I read ARE, and it was an Orthodox blog that originally introduced me to you, and some of the images/words on your blog felt quite similar.

I'm not too terribly clear on the distinctions between Catholicism and Orthodoxy... I've heard the tale of the Great Schism and all that. I just have never read/studied/learned much about Catholicism so excuse me in advance for my ignorance.

As I was saying in my now deleted comment:
I've always struggled with attempts to "prove" the existence of God because my belief system says we lived directly in His divine presence as His spirit children prior to our entry into this fallen mortal life. We HAD proof. Been there, done that, bought the T-shirt. The whole point of THIS life is to 1) get a physical body and learn from that experience and 2) Live by FAITH in the absence of proof.

But since you are coming from a Catholic perspective that doesn't hold the same notions I do about pre-existence I guess it makes sense to reach for evidence and "proof."

My question is this: If faith is believing in truth that cannot be seen, does finding EVIDENCE of God by its very nature reduce faith?

Joel Gamache said...

Belladonna,
Something I have always believed is that science will always lead us to God and the study of science is a form of theology, since He must be found in all of His works. The main point of my posts are to present an argument to someone who demands scientific proof of all things (the obtuse athiests in particular). I do not believe that scientific proof of the existance of God in anyway diminishes a life of faith, there are still plenty of things which must be taken on faith, such as the authority of Holy Scripture. Thank you for the challenge, and I hope I answered your question. If not, then I welcome more challenges.

Belladonna said...

I absolutely agree that studying science leads us to God. I believe God is the source of ALL truth. ANY place where we pursue truth we pursue God.

In the Book of Mormon there is a scripture that says: "But behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in you, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place for a portion of my words." (Alma 32:27)

While I personally tend to lean more toward the intuitive rather than analytical side of my nature, I can see the merit of reason and objectivity, study and scientific method in many things, even in knowing that we are all sons and daughters of God.

If we start with the hypothesis that God exists and holds us precious in His sight, then carefully experiment with that the evidence will unfold. This is NOT the same as seeking after signs. Faith precedes the miracle. As we extend our faith, or as the scripture says, even if it's just the DESIRE for faith - His mercy unfolds all around us.