Theological difference betweeen reproduction and evolution?

Question

I tried twice to express this question, and was unsuccessful.

My question is why the idea of a natural process like reproduction+childbirth is compatible with the existence of God, while the idea of a natural process like mutation+evolution is not ... (i.e. it is tantamount to atheism in fundamentalists' eyes).

(Note: The scientific merits of either theory are irrelevant to this question.)

The source of my question is this: I thought the main theological objection to evolution was something actually profound ... namely, that evolution by natural processes left no room for *purpose*. But if we can choose (or not choose) to imbue the natural process of reproduction+childbirth with divine purpose, then why is this not possible for mutation+evolution? I.e. reproduction+childbirth shows that God can work through natural processes that can be studied scientifically without eliminating that divine purpose.

Instead, all I got was "scripture says 6 days ... that's why."

The other two attempts:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvKPXSdRs4LMHeHll105Sn3sy6IX?qid=20070523193745AAOomjV
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=An353ELtJJlbbzwZaisH32_sy6IX?qid=20070523221036AAT88D3

Deof ... that ambiguity is far more a result of the "just a theory" mantra of creationists. Scientists know exactly the difference between the process of evolution (descent with modification, which is Darwin's preferred term) and the theory of evolution (the explanation of how that process occurs in nature and explains modern species).

But this (together with your wading into the "evidence" issue) is off-topic and irrelevant to my question, which is a *theological* question.

Answer 1

"evolution by natural processes left no room for *purpose*. But if we can choose (or not choose) to imbue the natural process of reproduction+childbirth with divine purpose, then why is this not possible for mutation+evolution?"

Your question was answered by several evolutionists who have been studying the issue for years, trying to understand all of life from an evolutionary framework. Their conclusion? All of our responses are programmed by evolution. Free will is illusionary. You may give yourself "purpose", but the idea is merely provoked by your programmed genes to protect itself.

Even the idea of evolution boils down to biological desire of survival of the fittest and is not necessarily true or helpful. It is merely another prompting of your genes.

Evolution by natural process leaves no room for purpose because it is all programmed. You simply can't help but be moved on in the tide of things or be killed off as the weak. Sorry, but these are the thoughts of scientific evolutionists who have thought through the ramifications of science-only investigations. Your ideas of purpose cannot be scientifically investigated or validated, thus they are inconsequential. Scientists, in their zeal to separate science and religion has blundered mightily, for it cannot give mankind purpose.

Only in Intelligent Design does hope and purpose arise, for by design we understand we were made for a purpose. Indeed we were: God designed us to have fellowship with Him.

By the way, we did not "choose" of ourselves to imbue childbirth with divine purpose. God imbues it with divine purpose and we choose to believe Him. When we do that, then we are ready to train our children to fulfill His purpose.

Good question!

Answer 2

The backyard strawberry is a hybrid species this is cultivated international for its fruit, the (hassle-free) strawberry. The fruit (which isn't easily a berry, yet an mixture accessory fruit) is notably favored for its function aroma, spectacular crimson coloration, juicy texture, and ask your self. it is fed on in great parts, the two clean or in arranged meals which incorporate preserves, fruit juice, pies, ice lotions, and milkshakes. synthetic strawberry aroma is likewise notably utilized in many industrialized nutrition products. The blackberry is an fit to be eaten fruit produced with the help of any of countless species interior the Rubus genus of the Rosaceae kinfolk. The fruit isn't a real berry; botanically it is termed an mixture fruit, composed of small drupelets. The flowers normally have biennial canes and perennial roots. Blackberries and raspberries are additionally reported as caneberries or brambles. it extremely is a typical, and nicely common team of over 375 species, a lot of that are heavily appropriate apomictic microspecies interior of sight in the time of the temperate northern hemisphere and South u . s . a . of america.

Answer 3

The problem with evolution is that evolutionists keep using the word ambiguously. One minute it means "descent with modification", the next it means "descent from a common ancestor (or pool of common ancestors)" and then try to present evidence for the former (which is fairly uncontroversial) with evidence for the latter.

Answer 4

'Purpose' is illogical. It borders on the metaphysical. Maybe it's well worth it to look into the second law of thermodynamics to make sense of how a 'god' concept fit into all this.

Answer 5

agreed

EDIT; the Bible does say that man was created from dirt, maybe that is why so many people have dirty minds.

Answer 6

I don't care, the Bible says man was created from dirt, so be it.

*sigh*