MS Fowler - 1/20/2005 1:58 PM
I think you are falling into the trap of the "big black box".
Best illustrated by the comic strip, "Calvin and Hobbs". Whenever they need a device to do something complex, ( transmorgify, teleport, time-travel etc) it is represented by a large cardboard box. It is always assumed that the device would work as Calvin thinks it would, and that it is always possible for someone to actually build it. But Calvin is a little boy; the world is vastly more complex than he imagines.
I believe you evolutionists are in a similar position. You assume the mechanisms to effect cellular change exist. They MUST exist. So they are relegated to a "black box" until someone can actually prove they exist.
You can observe the evolutionary process on a grand scale; it MUST exist on the micro scale, also, it only seems logical. But there is the problem; its not as easy as it seems.
As for it being arrogant for Christians to assume that we are the pinnacle of evolution, that is the clear teaching of the Bible. In the Creation account, God does say to man to rule and have dominion over the rest of creation. I understand, for a non-beleiver that the Bible carries no authority, but it is the authority for believers. We accept that the Bible is God's Word to His creation, and NOT simply man's stories about God. I understand from the point of view of a non-believer that it would be arrogant to put such words into the mouth of God, but that is not the case if, in fact, the Bible is God's Word for us.
The creationism solution is even more of a "big black box" as I see things. We know nothing about this creator directly, yet he is credited with everything we don't understand. He is even put in a position, by humans, of resisting the furtherance of the body of scientific knowledge of the human race. It is an historical fact that every time humans pit the bible or some other Christian doctrine up against science, eventually science wins. The sun is the center of our solar system, not the earth, right? All available scientific evidence that we have supports evolution. Nothing has been uncovered that makes evolution a non-feasible theory.
I think the idea that the Bible, written as you have noted by humans over a period of time, was meant to be taken to deny the existence of scientific discoveries that were not envisioned at the time it was written is very small minded and a sure course for bringing the relevance of the Bible into question over and over. So, when there are inconsistencies, why pit the Bible and other Christian doctrines against science? It is a waste of energy to me.
And, we may be the pinnacle of God's ability. While I personally believe thinking this is pointless and gives you a perspective on the universe that may ultimately be a serious, even fatal, disadvantage, I have no data to prove otherwise, so I will not continue to argue that point. It is also not necessary to win that point to make a case for suggesting we are still under development, which I find to be entirely consistent with my creator's plan. As has been noted, we are taller, longer living, and much more dependent on our mental agility than our physical agility today than when we first arrived, by whatever means. I think the religous right is just looking for something to fight over with this crap about creationism. They should expend their energy trying to find an acceptable solution that does not make those who wish to believe into cartoon characters in the modern scientific community. They can then expend all this energy being wasted trying to thwart the gathering and documenting the details of the human experience doing something meaningful, possibly even of a Christian spirit. Jim