How does creationism reconcile microevolution/is evolution still possible now?

Forums: Evolution, Creation, Microevolution, Phylogenetics, Coexisting Theories
Email this Topic • Print this Page

First question:

First, the simple definition of evolution I refer to (not as the origin of life on earth, just the theory of existing life changing as we speak): a species adapting by gradually shifting toward favorable traits.
Ex: viruses and bacteria eventually mutating to become disease resistant because one will mutate to have immunity to a treatment and subsequently have an easy time reproducing itself and becoming the dominant trait in the species (same species, but the species has become ever so slightly different by adapting to new challenges).

So I've been told that the creationist history argues against evolution as an origin of life, but (1) how is microevolution like the example above viewed? Is it considered acceptable because it takes place after God created the earth and kind of let it do its thing and become what it is today? Is that still viewed as evolution to the church or does the church have different terms for this? Does the church deny the existence of such events? If so, how are these shifts explained?

Follow up (2): Is it possible that evolution as commonly described in terms of a phylogenetic tree (branching species differentiating themselves from a common ancestor) occurred after creation, or is there something that disproves that? My question is why couldn't both happen? After all, we only have short, somewhat vague descriptions of what the original earth looked like and if that's true and 6,000 years have passed, then a lot obviously a lot could have changed. Is it unreasonable to think that evolution occurred after everything was created so both worked together?

I would really like to be able to talk to my Grandma about evolution since as a microbiologist its implications are very important to my research, but I don't know how to explain it to her and discuss it in terms that make sense to her faith because I wasn't raised in it as she was. I understand it's very hard to believe in/understand one teaching if you grew up with the other one.

I guess one further question: She doesn't believe in ANYTHING evolution related. She doesn't believe in my research on genetic relations between species or that microevolution occurs at all. Is that a normal creationist view or is she an exception?

Thanks very much for your help!

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 6 • Views: 1,474 • Replies: 15

No top replies

@liveracelove,

You're very welcome.

1 Reply

@Lordyaswas,

Well, I appreciate your sense of humor.

1 Reply

@liveracelove,

Thanks very much!

0 Replies

@liveracelove,

Don't go down the road of trying to shoehorn evolution into some subset of creationism. It's insulting to science and it's an incredibly weak argument to make the vetted, peer-reviewed work of a lot of people subject to an old document written down by a bunch of guys just made **** up and told stories years and years after the fact, if there is a nugget of fact in any of it.

Forcing the square peg of science into the round hole of the Bible is a lot like using The Wizard of Oz to explain creation. It has about as much validity.

And I say this as someone who believes in God, I might add.

Science isn't junior religion, and religion isn't junior science.

Instead, maybe have a nice chat with her about drug-resistant bacteria. Talk to her about how flu shots change every year, and why. Explain what peer-reviewed studies are, and why it's so damned hard to get an advanced scientific degree. Impress upon her that there is rigor behind evolutionary studies.

And maybe talk to her about her faith, about how she feels things and knows things with faith, and how the two are different but they aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

1 Reply

@liveracelove,

You should, better you understand what your gramma believes rather than shocve some science down her throat and of which, she will probably reject anyway.

Creationists "buy' a concept of microevolution because it retains for them, the concept of "kind" (as in animals, after their own "kind"...). They accept changes in variability like breeds and subspecies, just will not go beyond that because, to go beyond microevolution, dismisses the entire concept of "kind"

Its in da Bible and , if your gramma is a Christian Creationist or a Lubovitzer Jew or Hassidem, they all only accept the entire tales of animals within Genesis.

Good Luck, its really no big deal if you try to understand from where her beliefs come from(someone has to be the adult) , that way you can actually make your own research more evidence based.

0 Replies

Your grandmother probably will not live much longer. I don't say that to be cruel, it's just the way the cookie crumbles. It would be churlish to dismay her needlessly with the thought of you rejecting the things which she holds dear. It does you no harm to acquiesce in what is, after all, a small matter. Her love for you is a matter of far more importance.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

tkin a brek and surfin the boards. Im not gonna visit any Evo/devo/Creto thread.
I agree, that's the best way to handle this . Filling his gramma with negative emotion is not how I woulda handled my gramma. I wish I still had her around me, she and my two grndfathers were really wise with old world experiences.

I would never have messed with their deep faiths, no reason at all unless I hd this need to dominate discussions.

0 Replies

@liveracelove,

My grandmother was deeply religious. She would never have understood the things I understand about nature. Her world was different. The only thing I ever tried to convince her of was that I was happy with my view of the world. And I think that's all she ever really cared about anyway.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

It's possible that this grandmother is in her late 40s.

2 Replies

@jespah,

if hes an employed RESEARCHER in microbio, Id ssay hes at least in hi late 20's at erliest. Having grammas and a momma giving birth at 15 is kinda West Virginia.

Anywy, why is age a deliberate cause to be hurtful to one you apparently love?

1 Reply

@jespah,

Quote:

. It's insulting to science

I really think that ugly thing called 'evolution' is an insult for science!

It is just very simply NOT true. And, to be sure, I am NOT a creationist!

It is a very dumb theory and it is lacking in any evidence and so many other ways it is incredible!

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Oh, of course it isn't. I'm just commenting on the assumption that the grandmother is at death's door. She might not be.

0 Replies

@jespah,

In that case, the author may have decades of a loving relationship with his grandmother, which doesn't need to be spoiled by a needless insistence on something which upsets her.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Absolutely - I do feel that framing it in some way that the grandmother has to be debated with or convinced of anything is misplaced (I'm not saying you're suggesting that, and I don't think anyone here is). There's certainly a difference between close family you disagree with versus others. Why create issues where they don't need to exist?

0 Replies

@liveracelove,

liveracelove wrote:

After all, we only have short, somewhat vague descriptions of what the original earth looked like and if that's true and 6,000 years have passed, then a lot obviously a lot could have changed. Is it unreasonable to think that evolution occurred after everything was created so both worked together?

6000 years? there is pottery that is 18000 to 20000 years old. It's hard to discuss evolution with people who can't accept very basic facts.

_______

if it's true that you and your grandmother have different views on this matter, you have to decide whether there is any point in discussing it with her. Perhaps you just have to agree that the knowledge you have is different from her beliefs and that you are both happy with that.

0 Replies

How does creationism reconcile microevolution/is evolution still possible now?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know