Thursday, August 5, 2010

L 1.9

Loftus continues asking broad questions in the first chapter. “Why did it take god so long to create the stuff of the universe, which is less valuable and presumably less complex to create, than it did to create the most valuable and highly complex creatures to inhabit the earth?” (p.27)

First, why does it matter? As creator, God is justified either way and we are affected none.

Second, it is a technicality that what Loftus is saying is somewhat mistaken in that the "stuff" he refers to (stars, planets, etc) is constantly in a process of change. God created what we observe but, it hasn't always looked the way it appears now. Essentially, everything is a result of the primordial stuff that God created the universe with. Even the most fundamental, literal reading of the Bible agrees in that man was created from the dust of the Earth. It isn't so much that God created the stuff as it now appears. The question really becomes why God allowed the universe to unfold and progress the way that it has.

What Loftus is saying is that since non-human objects existed for so long prior to our appearance, people don't seem to be all that special even though the Bible says we are God's special creation. We merely appear to be part of the machine. This begs the question of why creation has to unfold differently for us to be special. Why is any other way more indicative of people being special than what we currently know? Loftus doesn't say. This seems to be an attempt to show that creationism is untenable. Since humans are so much more complex than the inanimate matter of the universe, humans should be much “older” relative to the age of the universe. What Loftus can’t say is how long humans will be around. It is possible that humans will eventually occupy a place in the universe for the vast majority of it’s lifespan thus eventually agreeing with his observation. Since this isn’t the case as of right now, Loftus is probably making the case that the reason why the ratio is what we observe is because people are the product of blind, natural forces as opposed to being divinely created. If this is the case, Loftus has omitted that there are some Christians who are theistic evolutionists or progressive creationists who don’t have a problem with scientific observations of the universe, especially in regards to human origins.

No comments: