by AgentR » Thu 24 Sep 2009, 15:21:27
Love how the internet has a habit of devolving any debate down to things like evolution, abortion, and evil handguns.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'N')ow for you Creationists out there.. how do you account for these other species of human?
You'd have to define Creationist more closely to get a real answer, as I suspect that you specifically would propose a definition that would make answering the stated question impossible.
Personally, I believe God created man, thus could be stated to be a "Creationist". I find no restrictions on the biochemical method by which God might have chosen to create homo sapiens. The creation stories one might site in Genesis teach the basic lesson that God created the universe, and he did it out of nothing (sounds like Big Bang to me). And considering that the time sequencing of the two accounts is contradictory, it is reasonable to assert that no scientifically measurable amount of time or order is implied by the stories.
Thus, evolution, as proposed by modern biology causes me no discomfort what so ever, and natural selection seems like a perfectly reasonable explanation of how things work.
I don't see why some find it so uncomfortable to hear one say, "Evolution with natural selection is the means by which God created man." Faith tells me WHO, Science tells me HOW.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ut again, what's the Bible tell you about all this? What, does the Bible say that neanderthals were not intelligent, and were just another animal on Noah's ark?
All the Bible has to say with regard to the physical problem you propose is that God created the universe, and he did it out of nothing. Passed that, fill in the blanks as you see fit.
Of course, I guess I'm lucky in these debates, being Catholic and reasonably well educated, I am content with the meaning and limitations of the Imprimitur; that the Bible is innerrant,
. Whether Neanderthal's were smart or not is not an issue covered in any way by the sacred texts.