Profane Faith Podcast: Evolution 2.0

In this brand new podcast interview, Daniel White Hodge of Profane Faith, and Perry Marshall of Evolution 2.0 discuss…

  • Perry’s brother, Bryan – who went from being a Christian missionary in China to 90% of the way to atheism in just 2 years of asking the TOUGH questions about creationism.
  • Perry’s journey from extremely conservative, young earth-creationism Christianity, to almost losing his religion, then back to faith restored and a much more solid revelation.
  • The Untold Story of Evolution.
  • Discerning between junk science and verifiable facts.
  • The true age of the earth.
  • What does a CELL know that we DON’T?
  • Perry’s $5 Million Dollar science prize to anybody who can find a naturally occurring, NON-designed code.
  • Are science and religion REALLY incompatible?
  • Who was Adam (in Genesis), REALLY?
  • How Creationists underestimate God.
  • How Darwinists underestimate nature.
  • The Big Bang and God are ALSO compatible?


7 Responses

  1. Michael Champion says:

    It’s too bad more people don’t know about how fast bacteria edit their genes, and transfer the edited genes to other bacteria, without having to reproduce. A researcher of bacteria would probably say that bacteria lack the neurological hardware to think, when experimental evidence shows that they demonstrated intelligent behavior in changing their genes that contradicts that assumption. Nobody is saying bacteria redesign themselves with conscious awareness on the level of human intelligence. Whether they’re conscious of what they’re doing or not, they still make the needed changes. So there is some kind of intelligent underlying process here in all life. It undermines the idea that life emerged through unconscious matter interactions, since entropy should prevail at that point. Consciousness is essential for this level of order. Or rather, while the bacteria are obviously not conscious at a human level, this evolution makes it clear that there is an underlying order to life that makes evolution possible in the first place.

    Great podcast, for all but that Genesis section in the last 14 minutes. Needless to say, I disagree with Christianity and Genesis, but I won’t go too much into that here.There is something big you seem to be missing in your attempt to make Genesis fit science. Not only do you have to make a reason why the 7 periods you’re going to call Days are accurate to earth’s history, you also have to think of 7 different symbolic Evenings and Mornings which represent something other than an actual sunset and sunrise. The use of evening and morning in genesis makes it pretty clear that the story refers to actual 24 hour days. That’s the whole point of using the word. Additionally, if the authors really wanted to refer to distinct epochs that were not days, they’d use a different word. Unless you can think of some translation reason why this isn’t the case, it seems pretty clear. It is not described as some parable to be deciphered. This is not the New Testament, the intended interpretation is said pretty directly. Given the society in which the old testament was written, this is unsurprising.

    • The word day is “yom” in Hebrew and does not mean 24 hours, it means all kinds of things. If you look this up in a concordance this is pretty clear. “Evening and morning” is a phrase indicating completion.

      • Michael Champion says:

        Saying ‘evening and morning’ being mentioned in the specific context of the word day is just a sign of completion is a real stretch to me. There are plenty of better words for that which aren’t related to sunset and sunrise.

        I don’t get why proving Genesis is important to you, when plenty of Christians just ignore the old testament. Does it seem necessary to you because you think the bible categorically must be an unimpeachable source of truth, in at least some sort of allegorical/metaphorical form?

        • I do not feel it’s necessary to harmonize Genesis with science. I don’t think it’s necessary to read Genesis as literal simple straightforward history.

          However some people do.

          And furthermore I do think it’s interesting that with a very few very simple assumptions the two can be reconciled.

          It’s tine to read it as archetypal. I’ve told the story quite a few times of doing a Genesis study years ago with a bunch of non Christians and I said “I don’t care if you read this as real or figurative, let’s just see what it says.”

          Three weeks into it they were mesmerized and quite moved because they weren’t just reading the story- the story was also reading them.

          In either case, the first few chapters in Genesis, in the space of a couple of blog posts, pinpoints the human condition better than any other piece of literature in existence. It is very, very deep. And I would also agree that when people obsessively try to compare it to the science narrative they miss the real points of the story.

      • Michael Champion says:

        That’s a stretch. Evening and morning is context showing it is day by day. Otherwise you just say the day ended and a new day began. Or really, use a better word than day.

        • Read Genesis chapter 2 and pay attention to how many times and ways the word “DAY” is used in the first few chapters of Genesis:

          https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3117&t=KJV
          (just do page search for the word “day” and you’ll see what I mean)

        • From https://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48951136.html – Jewish commentators weigh in

          Nachmanides says the text uses the words “Vayehi Erev” ― but it doesn’t mean “there was evening.” He explains that the Hebrew letters Ayin, Resh, Bet ― the root of “erev” ― is chaos. Mixture, disorder. That’s why evening is called “erev”, because when the sun goes down, vision becomes blurry. The literal meaning is “there was disorder.” The Torah’s word for “morning” ― “boker” ― is the absolute opposite. When the sun rises, the world becomes “bikoret”, orderly, able to be discerned. That’s why the sun needn’t be mentioned until Day Four. Because from erev to boker is a flow from disorder to order, from chaos to cosmos. That’s something any scientist will testify never happens in an unguided system. Order never arises from disorder spontaneously and remains orderly. Order always degrades to chaos unless the environment recognizes the order and locks it in to preserve it. There must be a guide to the system. That’s an unequivocal statement.

Leave a Reply

You must use your real first and last name. Anonymity is not allowed.
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *