Site Loader
Rock Street, San Francisco

, Research Paper

electronic mail: byrdd @ Doctrine Concerning Humankind and SinThe Christian Doctrine of Mankind is Created, Free-willed, Image of God ( Dr. Friend, 9/20/97 ) . In this paper I will discourse the creative activity versus development facet of the created part of that philosophy. Scientists and theologists have disagreed on this topic since who knows when. It was likely one of the first subjects of conversation when adult male was allowed by God to explicate the first linguistic communication. Was adult male created by God, ex nihilo? Did adult male merely germinate from some minute, unthinking being? Scientists and theologists ponder these inquiries, and have filled many books on the topic. However, neither side can turn out, in human footings, their statement. Scientists can follow the development concatenation back to Australopithecus. However, there is a nexus losing to finish the concatenation. Theologians, on the other manus, stand house on the creative activity theory as told in the Bible. Each side is dogmatic in their beliefs. & # 8220 ; Worlds are non animals of blind cosmic forces, helpless and hopeless before the relentless beat and rhythms of nature. On the contrary, they are endowed with self-respect, intent, and power by their Godhead & # 8221 ; ( Marthaler said in The Creed, pg. 56 ) . & # 8220 ; In the finest laboratories the simple cell can non be created from inanimate affair. Even if it could, that would turn out that the elements need a directing force to bring forth a life substance & # 8221 ; ( Did Man Get Here by Evolution or by Creation? Pg. 26, Watch Tower Bible & A ; Tract Society of Penn. ) . These two citations are merely a smathering of information on the creative activity facet of humanity. Although these statements are significant, they still do non turn out that the creative activity theory is, in fact, true, nor do they confute it. & # 8220 ; Although some evolutionists believe that a Creator began the procedure, most today teach that life arose from inanimate affair without godly aid. Today the huge bulk of those who influence the thought of people accept development as a fact & # 8221 ; ( Did Man Get Here by Evolution or by Creation pgs. 6 & A ; 7, Watch Tower Bible & A ; Tract Society of Penn. ) . Evolutionists contend that we are posterities of hairy, tailless, apelike work forces. This has ne’er been proven. & # 8220 ; One of the premier troubles is that truly important human dodo skulls are exceptionally rare & # 8221 ; ( New Scientist, 3/25/65 ) . I have known persons that make the theory of development about credible. These persons fit the description of what the first scientists thought that the Neanderthal Man would hold looked like, knee bend, beastly, slightly anthropoid. Still I do non believe that world evolved from apelike animals. I do non cognize of anyone that goes to a menagerie or into the jungles of the universe to see anthropoid relations. & # 8220 ; Man, as the full existence, was created by God and is the crowning of all His work & # 8221 ; ( Alberione said in Introduction to Christian Doctrine, pg. 20 ) . & # 8220 ; Harmonizing to the testimony of the Scriptures adult male, in his present human signifier, was created by God as the decision and consummation of all creative activity & # 8221 ; ( Lewis, Sperry, Chafer said in Major Bible Themes, pg. 129 ) . The Bible is filled with the truth of creative activity, that adult male was created from the dust of the Earth as revealed in the undermentioned books of the Bible: Gen. 1:27 ; Gen. 2: 7 ; Gen. 6: 7 ; Dt. 4: 32 ; Ps. 148: 5 ; Is. 42: 5 ; Is. 43: 1 ; Is. 54: 1

6 ; Ez. 28: 15 ; Mal. 2: 10 ; 1 Cor. 11: 9 ; Eph. 2: 10 ; Eph. 4: 24. “It is natural that adult male should seek to understand his ain beginning. It is hence sensible to anticipate that God would uncover these facts to adult male. This He has done in the Bible” ( Lewis, Sperry, Chafer said in Major Bible Themes, pg. 128 ) . Harmonizing to the Very Reverend James Alberione, S.S.P. , S.T.D. “To create agencies to pull out things from nil, without doing usage of any preexistent substance. To make is proper to God alone” ( Introduction to Christian Doctrine, pg. 14 ) .

& # 8220 ; God created, God created within species, development takes topographic point within species & # 8221 ; ( Dr. Friend, 10/4/97 ) . I reasonably much agree with this statement except the development portion. The development within species concept is fundamentally the same theory that Pierre Teilhard De Chardin espoused in his Hagiographas, which I find really hard to read. & # 8220 ; Darwin tried to explicate that development produced the oculus by many little transitional phases. Evolutionists today say it was test and mistake, and as one little passage proved advantageous it was passed along and built upon by ulterior 1s. But, irrespective of what sort of animal we examine, wherever there is an oculus, it is complete, and non in a transitional phase of development & # 8221 ; ( Did Man Get Here by Evolution or by Creation? pgs. 35 & A ; 36, Watch Tower Bible & A ; Tract Society of Penn. ) . & # 8220 ; Whether or non development has taken topographic point is to be decided from a survey of the facts. As to whether such development, presuming it to hold taken topographic point, leads to the denial or the averment of the being of God, that is a inquiry for doctrine and for metaphysics, which will hold to think with revealed faith & # 8221 ; ( Corte said in The Origins of Man, pg. 130 ) . Genesis 2: 7 says that & # 8220 ; The Lord God formed adult male and breathed into his anterior nariss the breath of life, and adult male became a life being & # 8221 ; ( the Bible ) . The declaration that adult male is a divinely created human spirit can merely be made by a spiritual, believing individual. & # 8220 ; A petition for cogent evidence is every bit absurd as the petition to turn out that God exists & # 8221 ; ( Jabay said in Search for Identity, pg. 15 ) . Was mankind created as attested to throughout the Bible or did he simply evolve as the modern theory of development would hold us believe? I find it difficult to believe that world evolved through a series of mutants and natural choice. If this were a feasible theory, would it non do sense that human mutations ( i.e. Downes Syndrome ) would be in the bulk? & # 8220 ; Since Lamarck s theory ( Acquired Characteristics ) has been proven false, it is merely of historical involvement. Darwin s theory ( Natural Selection ) does non satisfactorily explicate the beginning and heritage of fluctuations DeVries theory ( Large Mutations ) has been shown to be weak because no individual mutant or set of mutants has of all time been so big and legion that it has been known to get down a new species in one coevals of progenies & # 8221 ; ( Did Man Get Here by Evolution or by Creation? pgs. 16 & A ; 17, Watch Tower Bible & A ; Tract Society of Penn. ) . Creation or development, the argument continues. Who is right and who is incorrect? Is a good stake that world will non happen the replies in this life as we know it. As for me, I am a Bible believing Baptist that merely can non accept the theory of development, non even within species. This argument, along with many others, will be answered when Christ returns for His Bride.

Post Author: admin