> > >The first is a claim to creation ex nihilo, the second >the fulfilled prophecy. Other ancient books make creation claims, but all of >them involve supernatural beings modifying pre-existent material. > Don't get me wrong. I'm not an apoligist for evolution - not at all. But I can see where a Christian might say, well God created everything, but maybe he didn't snap his fingers, maybe he went through a process to get to the end result. There might be two scriptural arguments, God didn't make the world in one shot, but he made it in steps. IF God were describing evolution, we wouldn't expect a biology course, we might expect an abstract summary that the process was multi-staged. Secondly, he didn't even make woman by snapping his fingers, he modified a man. Not the same thing I know, but it is a precedent that God doesn't always start ex nihilo.
The entropy arguments aren't that good. If you have a mutation mechanism, and a selection mechanism, then there can be a reduction in entropy. The question is, was there enough time, and a big enough sampling to result in life as we know it without God. I can't see it myself. There are far too few mutations and I never saw a mutation which was a benefit. The point is, a thoughtful Christian could possibly believe in evolution. I realise it raises a bunch of problems, but we shouldn't get all obsessive about this issue. I'm sure the Enemy uses it for his purposes.
