Looking for Former Evolutionists who are now Creationists

I can't really claim to be an ex-evolutionist. When I was about 12, my evolutionist-by-default, biologist father became a YEC. As a young geek I chose creationism also but never believed the creationist rhetoric on:(i) circular reasoning in the fossil record
(ii) lack of beneficial mutations
(iii) lack of radioisotopic trends
(iv) the universe was youngFrom about the age of 18 I somehow knew that relativity would potentially account for (iv) and that either chemical effects or cosmological effects were accelrating decay, accounting for (iii). I simply never found any reason for the creationist insistances on (i) and (ii). So there you have it.My father became convinced of creation through his observations of life under the microscope. Shortly afterward he became convinced of the validity of the Old Testament through a 6-part seminar series on Biblical archeology (I attended this at age 12 with him). At the end of that same year he was woken in the night and had an Acts 2 experience completely independently of any person or organization. He had no real idea what had happened to him. The following Easter he came across an old prayer book he still had from Germany. On the front cover was a lithograph of the Day of Pentecost.

^ At the cellular and molecular level it is very evident that life works mechanistically with each part having a purpose. There is no doubt about that.You just seem to think it could have arrived naturalistically.

^ I think it was the basic goings on in the cell. He used to talk a lot about mitochondria. I'll ask him. I strongly suspect it was the 'big picture' (no pun intended) that he saw that dawned on him.

SchrafIt's not a black and white answer. As a scientist of course I understand that life works mechanistically. I know that there is no law of physics broken when a gene duplicates and drifts. Evolution is possible.But the life on this planet is incredible. The most likely amnswer is creation. Since that realization God has witnesseed that to my heart in numerous ways. Thre is no proof.Your point is a valid one. But I still believe God would tell you that you are kidding yourself when you doubt the validity of the design arguement.

MammuthusI started out believing the entire Scriptures out of pure trust. Here and there over time occasional doubts creep in despite the fact that one holds strongly to the central tenents. But over the last 10 years I have seen numerous evidences that the Bible is incredibly trustworthy in every respect. But I can't prove it to you. I recommend the journey but it would be your journey.The Bible is not consistent with God using macroevolution. We were created in God's image. Even if by some bizaree contortions you get God using evolution it would rip the 'blind watchmaker' heart out of evolution. Death came by one man's sin just as life came bu one man. And if there was a truly global flood then that can potentially explain the fossil record so we simply don't need evolution to explain the prehistory of life or this planet.The Apostle Peter clearly explains, almost mentioning Darwin and Lyell by name (), that it would be the concept of 'everything goes on as it has before' that would led those scoffers of creaiton and the flood from the truth:

quote:

---

2 Pet 3:1Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I have written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to wholesome thinking. 2I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles. 3First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4They will say, "Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation." 5But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

---

For YECs the literalness of the flood and creation are no less literal than the 2nd coming. They are sealed 'by the same word'. Studying rocks and organisms and proclaiming them to have arrived gradually is an incredible fulfilment of this prophecy of Scipture. The events of creation and the flood were nothing like the intervenning gradual processes.[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 11-26-2002]

KarlThat Scripture is in the context of creation, the flood and the 2nd coming. 'Everything goes on as it has since creation' is an extremly good match for uniformitarianisms 'The present is the key to the past'.I'm not necessarily saying we 'look' like God. But our deepest biological and mental attributes do match His acording to Scripture. So my point is rather that God had a desired endpoint and he would have had to prod evolution to get it there. You may think that God could have embedded us in asexual sentient worms but the Scriptures link the (temporal) genders to eternal concepts of Christ and the Church.Death by sin. I personally suspect that Adam's death occurred within a thousand year 'day'. Sounds like a cop out but it explains a lot. All of the long lived ones died before 1000 years old. How does Scripture end? In revelation we see that man lives for 1000 years on Earth (the millenium) and Satan is loosed for a season to see that the curse is broken. Then he is sent to the pit forever. Of course there are multiple addiitoonal incredible reasons to go for 1000 year 'days' (Heb 4, 2 Pet 3, Ps). I agree that spirutal death occurred immediately for Adam. Christs work will heal both spiritual and mortal death. This age is a temporary one. I love life but it is not the main event.Theistic evoltuion is a must if evolution occurred. I agree. However, if we take God at his word, that there was a global flood, then there is no reason to believe in evoltuion and so we can allow God to do it however he did it. The straight forward reading is that he created. You can beleiv in evoltuion and long ages if you want but you are completely ignoring the declaration of the global flood.

MammuthusChristianity is not really so much about belief as it is about responses and attitude.I have no a priori problem with Christians who beleive in evolution. But what is behind that belief? Is it becasue there is that fight against conscience that if the Bible is true to that extent then maybe it is true about the things that are even more distasteful ('take up your cross' etc)? In that case they are disobeying their conscience. So I wont make a blanket statement.Empirically I have noticed a very large correlation (R ~ 0.8 ) between belief in creation and many of the other finer points of Christianity.

SchrafI can't prove it to you. But I have numerous proofs of God in my life including a handful of undeniable miracles and so I beleive him about creation and the flood. I can only recommend the journey.Science is simply compatible with creaton and the flood.I never said there is no differnece between ID and non-ID. You can try and quantify the significance of ID. I still think God would say 'Sorry Schraf, but it was intuitively obvious. You went thorugh incredible contortions to conjour me away but I'm still here and I did it just like I said I did'.

I had breakfast with my parents this morning as I do each Wednesday when I drop the kids off for a visit.Dad said it was the structure-function relationships in mitochondria and chloroplasts evident under the electron microscope that struck him as more likely to have been designed than evolved. In particular, the ATPase 'knobs' that appear in the membranes of both of these organelles protrude one way in mitochondria and the other way in chloroplasts to achieve funciton. As with all of the thousands of protein types in a cell they funciton mechanistically via structure. ATPases are reverse proton pumps that catalytically construct ATP.