Some Basic Data
What is it evolution? Changes that create a kind of creature advanced to a higher degree is called macro-evolution, and that is what is generally meant by the word "evolution." Here it is to explain how evolutions should distinguish micro-evolution and macro-evolution, although Professor Glinka did not agree with that distinction.
Micro-evolution is evolution that occurs in a particular species, or wombed and produced by the close species.The evolution of this type is justified because it was held one hundred percent every day by humans in places or in the laboratory breeding of plants, to improve the seeds.
Micro-evolution is evolution that occurs in a particular species, or wombed and produced by the close species.The evolution of this type is justified because it was held one hundred percent every day by humans in places or in the laboratory breeding of plants, to improve the seeds.
Macro-evolution, as new noted above that the change which makes a kind of creature climbed to a higher degree. For example, a fish turned as a snake, a snake into birds, and others. Such changes appear to contain new organs, such as legs, wings, lungs. Should not be analyzing about the facts “which witnessed”, because humans have never seen a fish turn into a snake, or a snake to a bird. Nevertheless, molecular biology has confirmed that such changes were possible that the mutations in the "code" or when genetically developed.
After Jean-Baptiste de Monet Lamark, the French (1744-1829), and especially after Charles Robert Darwin, the British (1809-1882), biological sciences seek to discover evolution.The factors used in the nineteenth century can be held accountable, for the most part, microevolution only. Lamark highlights the influence of environment and adaptation of living beings in that environment.
To explain macro-evolution, science biology must be used. Science is already familiar with the spectacular progress since it illuminates the role of radicals from the genetic code that gaze in the mother-cells of living things; this code to control the entire development of the organism. In the degree that the essential processes of evolution, particularly macroevolution, must be placed, because of modifications of the genetic code which could account for the birth of the structures of new organic, but still need to seek the powers of the new mutations. And not at all satisfactory to rely on mutations that occur by chance alone to explain about movement and the finality of evidence that characterizes the movement.
The role of the biological sciences is not yet known when Darwin was talking about evolution. And the shortage is also what makes old-fashioned Darwinism is fundamental if not equipped with what is in front of our new record, and is often called neo-Darwinism.
The evolution takes billions of years, and presents to the paleontologist an untold number of species in which many are already gone, because the history of life affected by a variety of impasse and regression. However, when viewed in its entirety, revealing a line of evolution is incredible ride, not only in terms of diversity of sentient creatures in the world of plants and animal world, but also and more than the greater perfection in living animal, which culminating with Homo species.
Evolution in Christian Perspective
If John Paul II, a few years ago, saying that there is no conflict between evolution and Christian understanding (especially of creation), he mentioned the name of Darwin, because that's the name that is still the most representative of the evolution of the public. And it is said that Darwinism is not contrary to Christian understanding. But that does not mean that Pope equalizes evolution with Darwinism. As we noted earlier, Darwinism, if not fundamentally equipped with other natural laws, especially with biology (DNA and "genetic code"), then it is skipped, because it is too simplistic.
Additionally, if the Pope reminded the Christians that there is no conflict between evolution and religion, he did not expect that he said something new, as if it had just and for the first time the official Magisterium of the Church does not object to evolution. However, there are two popular opinions that need to be blamed, because of mistake. The first mistake, the identification of evolution with Darwinism as the opinion of Christian understanding in general and of Pope John Paul II recently. And the second mistake, which reported the Pope's recent speech in such a way that makes the readers think that the recognition and positive acceptance of evolution of the Church is something new. In fact, recognition is already there at least since 60 years. Was not John Paul II's speech was reminiscent of the encyclical “Humani Generis” of Pius XII (1950) which says that the general opinion was that time in the Christian world that does not deviate towards fundamentalism?
In this light, the French magazine L’ Actualite Religieuse, (N.150, 15 December 1996) published an article entitled “Evolustion bien comprise” (Evolution in the true meaning).This article commends on the declaration of John Paul II about our new annunciation. As it was reported that on October 23, 1996, on the occasion of the Pontifical Academy Session Plenarium Sciences Empirical that the Pope faced the theme of evolutionism. He agreed to admit that the theory of evolution is "not just a hypothesis only", but a fact. However, he negates theories that consider the human spirit (the spiritual dimension of man) as a result of material forces alone, or think the spirit is nothing more than a epiphany of that material. "Cardinal Carlo Martini, archbishop of Milan, Italy, wonders to see how the Pontifical speech that resulted in "surprise" so big in some circles: "I did not find anything new in the text of the Pontifical it. Evolutionist hypothesis has been recognized by Pius XII in 1950 … just to remind the Pope that since the creation is realized (made) by an evolutionary process, then the process was worth ignored, but to remain conscious that the Christian values, namely the spiritual dimension of man and fate (destination) eternal-not depends on scientific discoveries.
In short, today, theological difficulties (in front of the science) are gone. Thanks to advances in the exegesis, thanks to the kinds of literary distinction, we know how to find the religious message of Scripture in the formulation of symbolic and figurative. The message is clear that God is the Creator of all that exists. So, if the species originated proposal from one another since the first forms of life, it means that evolution is a disaggregated by God to create all the creatures in each, including humans in the biological dimension. All creatures depend on God who gave all to them, both the existence and evolutionary dynamism.
If so, why, at the beginning of the theory of evolution, most of the religious world rejects? Evolution is presented to the world for the first time, as an explanation of material developments until the emergence of life, and the emergence of humans, the scientific experts tend to see that this new understanding is something contrary to creation of the universe by God. Why? Especially because at the end of the nineteenth century and the first part of the twentieth century "scientism" was the one who still rule the science world. No wonder Karl Marx in this harsh climate materialist, taking the opportunity theory of evolution to write: "The creation of the earth has been shaken hard by the evolution, the science that describes the form and the earth as a process, a growth of life itself. Growth is spontaneous practical refutation only against creation theory”.
Many other materialists use evolution as a weapon to attack religion. In short time the general tendency is to look at the evolution through the narrow lens of "scientism", and thus, equalize with a form of materialism. That is why many religious believers feel the need to reject evolution, which is always interpreted as if it should be materialists and deny God. However, it is worth noting that the “dogma of ‘scientism’ was never supported by major figures in the field of exact science”. But very unfortunately, "that's something that is not recognized by most people."
But, gratefully that chaos, due to lack of philosophical reflection, has passed. Teilhard de Chardin and role in the debate was not small. However, still many people not knowing how evolution and creationism articulates each other. So the error still exists in the following form: or evolution, or creation. The dilemma is entirely fictitious. Why? Because evolution is a scientific idea, while the creation including the field of philosophical and theological. Someone who is religious and would not deny the fact of evolution is ensured by so much evidence (although how the fact of evolution took place and according to rules which were far from clear) will recognize both evolution and creation. This can be described as follows: a series of data bound to each other in an evolutionary sort of horizontal lines, each point of the line is tied to the Creator thanks to a vertical relationship. Vertical relationship is the bond of creation. There is no contradiction whatever between the two types of lines.
Evolution, Intelligibility of the Shining Mirror
But it is based on the vision of evolution and religion (especially in terms of creationism) should be added that evolution makes clearer the need for God as the Creator. “It is clear that a theist interpretation of evolution at all coherent, and even, in my opinion, it is far more convincing interpretation, from the rational and religious, rather than naturalistic interpretation, namely evolution without God Professor Emeritus Bonansea expressed the same opinion: "Concerning the doctrine of creation, not only is there no conflict between science and religion, but rather science is de facto supporting the doctrine of creation".
Why? Because this world, through evolution, reflecting an increasingly brilliant intelligibility. "The development of evolution does not take place in any direction. He lasted in the direction of a structure that plays old games.. complex, leading to a complex matter, in life and consciousness ... There is a pre-adaptation to a synthesis, a 'tendency' to integrate them in a new form, higher; in the direction of a formation. “As a result, according to Jean Doros, Professor Titularis Department of Zoology (University of Paris), he led for ten years:
“World order is the evident. Order was given to the world published by a superior power which I call God. And this is where faith meets with science. Faith that, far from being in opposition with science, in contract to complete it by a more modest understanding of the world. Preparation of the living world for a few billion years cannot be imagined without a plan, and that's why I was forced to admit the existence of a supreme power. The preparation of the world's living things cannot be understood by others. "
The whole evolution is something that “is thought". And the result is living creatures "which contains within itself a large quantity of intelligence, greater than that required to build a Cathedral. Intelligence is called" information "(which is etched in the structure of matter), but it does not change the nature of the problem. Stated Intelligence is a condition sine qua non of life. Where is that intelligence? That problem becomes interesting for both biologists, as well as for philosophers. And empirical science cannot (not competent) to solve it. Because the material itself does not think, but it is inhabited by the dynamic principle, “ideas”, organizing programs, which hold the election, selection, make calculations, and pave the way for “intelligent”, then that matter can only restore in our election, a regulator of transcendent wisdom. Thus, the universe can be seen as a kind of participation, a disclosure of the Mind and Wisdom incarnate divine transcendence. Would not this mean that so often appear in many Psalms, concerning the heavens and the earth that Enarrant Gloriam Dei? (Declare the glory of God).
Intelligibility of the universe is "an argument for the defense of theism, because it proves that behind its laws (patterns) there is a Creator Intelligence." Thus a brief opinion J. Polkinghorne, Mathematical Physics expert, lecturer at Cambridge, a member of the Royal Society, who obtained his doctorate in theology to deepen the relationship between science and religion, about the intelligibility of the universe as the Creator’s instructions.
Myth of "Coincidence"
Darwin argued that the explanation to replace the finality (the plans, projects, and goals) in the universe with a chance to explain everything, as if it shifts the creationism theory. That is a extrapolation which not only exceed the methodological limits of science, but especially something that is denied by the law of mathematics. The universe is billions and billions of times younger and less extensive to explain, through pure coincidence, the emergence of a single protein alone! However, do not deny the existence of coincidence. What is undeniable is the coincidence as a basic factor of evolution. Conversely, the finalization is so strong that, if it happened by chance a combination of positive elements of his riches, then it will use a combination of being realized. In other words, coincidence was finalized.
In his comments about the whole issue of evolution by Darwin and intellectual climate of his day coloring, MA Corey, a philosophical relationship between science and religion, wrote: "It would be foolish if denied the finality of the divine (divine teleology) just because we're about to find part of the natural tools used by God to hold the universe. In fact, characteristic teleological (finalists) world more visible again with the theory of evolution because the theory is based on natural selection (natural selection), and thus shows that the dynamism, dynamism naturalistic really determined to result in an outcome terminal natural selection (natural selection), and thus shows that dynamism-naturalistic dynamism was determined to result in an outcome as a destination terminal. "
To be added here that the same opinion of Erasmus Darwin (1731-1820), grandfather of Charles Darwin: "It could happen that the world is made step by step, based on starting points very small (very small Beginnings) via the activity of inner principles contained in material, rather than born this world at once and all of a sudden in its entirety. What a brilliant and wonderful, the idea, namely the infinite power of God, who created the causes of the results, rather than creating their own direct of after another. "
New Opinions
It is interesting to see how the flow of positive thoughts about the evolution of Christian scholars has been coloring a lot since 1920-1930, especially in philosophy and theology experts. For example, A.D. Sertillanges, Op, who are close friends with Henri Bergson, writing: “if the hypothesis of evolution is true, then God ‘proven’ twice: once through the world of its own, and once again through the evolution…if evolution does not exist-and that was the situation, then, evolution is proven, other great powers of God, His discretion also generous thanks to Him that He acts through his own work after he makes the work dynamic and power. "
Therefore, 70 years ago, evolution is not seen as a threat or an objection to creationism. Instead, mainly thanks to the influence of Teilhard de Chardin, evolution is seen as a concrete way how creation is manifested in time and space by a Creator who does not temporal and spatial dimension. Therefore, for God, “one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is equal to one day”. "The Church appreciates the natural sciences in their respective fields and does not consider them as a danger but rather as a very impressive revelation of Allah Creator" (John Paul II).
“Science can purify religion from error(error) and superstition, religion can purify science from idolatry(idolatri), and from the things that is absolutely false, Science and religion each can incorporate each other into a wider world, a world where both can flourish” (John Paul II)
Longing for your comments please!
Glossary
Sentient: a) Having sense of perception, conscious, b) experiencing sensation
Reminiscent: recalling of something in the past
Deviate: To differ or move away from an established course, way, or prescribed mode of behavior.
Fundamentalism: a) A Protestant movement holding the Bible to be the sole authority. b) A movement marked by rigid adherence to basic principles.
Exegesis: Critical interpretation or explanation of a text.
Hypothesis: Idea or suggestion used as a starting point for reasoning or explanation.
Annunciation: Announcement; proclamation.
Epiphany: when you suddenly feel that you understand, or suddenly become conscious of, something that is very important to you or a powerful religious experience.
Disaggregate: to separate, and multiply from combination
Extrapolation: to guess or think about what might happen using information that is already known
Written by Paul
What is it evolution? Changes that create a kind of creature advanced to a higher degree is called macro-evolution, and that is what is generally meant by the word "evolution." Here it is to explain how evolutions should distinguish micro-evolution and macro-evolution, although Professor Glinka did not agree with that distinction. Micro-evolution is evolution that occurs in a particular species, or wombed and produced by the close species.The evolution of this type is justified because it was held one hundred percent every day by humans in places or in the laboratory breeding of plants, to improve the seeds.
Micro-evolution is evolution that occurs in a particular species, or wombed and produced by the close species.The evolution of this type is justified because it was held one hundred percent every day by humans in places or in the laboratory breeding of plants, to improve the seeds.
Macro-evolution, as new noted above that the change which makes a kind of creature climbed to a higher degree. For example, a fish turned as a snake, a snake into birds, and others. Such changes appear to contain new organs, such as legs, wings, lungs. Should not be analyzing about the facts “which witnessed”, because humans have never seen a fish turn into a snake, or a snake to a bird. Nevertheless, molecular biology has confirmed that such changes were possible that the mutations in the "code" or when genetically developed.
After Jean-Baptiste de Monet Lamark, the French (1744-1829), and especially after Charles Robert Darwin, the British (1809-1882), biological sciences seek to discover evolution.The factors used in the nineteenth century can be held accountable, for the most part, microevolution only. Lamark highlights the influence of environment and adaptation of living beings in that environment.
To explain macro-evolution, science biology must be used. Science is already familiar with the spectacular progress since it illuminates the role of radicals from the genetic code that gaze in the mother-cells of living things; this code to control the entire development of the organism. In the degree that the essential processes of evolution, particularly macroevolution, must be placed, because of modifications of the genetic code which could account for the birth of the structures of new organic, but still need to seek the powers of the new mutations. And not at all satisfactory to rely on mutations that occur by chance alone to explain about movement and the finality of evidence that characterizes the movement.
The role of the biological sciences is not yet known when Darwin was talking about evolution. And the shortage is also what makes old-fashioned Darwinism is fundamental if not equipped with what is in front of our new record, and is often called neo-Darwinism.
The evolution takes billions of years, and presents to the paleontologist an untold number of species in which many are already gone, because the history of life affected by a variety of impasse and regression. However, when viewed in its entirety, revealing a line of evolution is incredible ride, not only in terms of diversity of sentient creatures in the world of plants and animal world, but also and more than the greater perfection in living animal, which culminating with Homo species.
Evolution in Christian Perspective
If John Paul II, a few years ago, saying that there is no conflict between evolution and Christian understanding (especially of creation), he mentioned the name of Darwin, because that's the name that is still the most representative of the evolution of the public. And it is said that Darwinism is not contrary to Christian understanding. But that does not mean that Pope equalizes evolution with Darwinism. As we noted earlier, Darwinism, if not fundamentally equipped with other natural laws, especially with biology (DNA and "genetic code"), then it is skipped, because it is too simplistic.
Additionally, if the Pope reminded the Christians that there is no conflict between evolution and religion, he did not expect that he said something new, as if it had just and for the first time the official Magisterium of the Church does not object to evolution. However, there are two popular opinions that need to be blamed, because of mistake. The first mistake, the identification of evolution with Darwinism as the opinion of Christian understanding in general and of Pope John Paul II recently. And the second mistake, which reported the Pope's recent speech in such a way that makes the readers think that the recognition and positive acceptance of evolution of the Church is something new. In fact, recognition is already there at least since 60 years. Was not John Paul II's speech was reminiscent of the encyclical “Humani Generis” of Pius XII (1950) which says that the general opinion was that time in the Christian world that does not deviate towards fundamentalism?
In this light, the French magazine L’ Actualite Religieuse, (N.150, 15 December 1996) published an article entitled “Evolustion bien comprise” (Evolution in the true meaning).This article commends on the declaration of John Paul II about our new annunciation. As it was reported that on October 23, 1996, on the occasion of the Pontifical Academy Session Plenarium Sciences Empirical that the Pope faced the theme of evolutionism. He agreed to admit that the theory of evolution is "not just a hypothesis only", but a fact. However, he negates theories that consider the human spirit (the spiritual dimension of man) as a result of material forces alone, or think the spirit is nothing more than a epiphany of that material. "Cardinal Carlo Martini, archbishop of Milan, Italy, wonders to see how the Pontifical speech that resulted in "surprise" so big in some circles: "I did not find anything new in the text of the Pontifical it. Evolutionist hypothesis has been recognized by Pius XII in 1950 … just to remind the Pope that since the creation is realized (made) by an evolutionary process, then the process was worth ignored, but to remain conscious that the Christian values, namely the spiritual dimension of man and fate (destination) eternal-not depends on scientific discoveries.
In short, today, theological difficulties (in front of the science) are gone. Thanks to advances in the exegesis, thanks to the kinds of literary distinction, we know how to find the religious message of Scripture in the formulation of symbolic and figurative. The message is clear that God is the Creator of all that exists. So, if the species originated proposal from one another since the first forms of life, it means that evolution is a disaggregated by God to create all the creatures in each, including humans in the biological dimension. All creatures depend on God who gave all to them, both the existence and evolutionary dynamism.
If so, why, at the beginning of the theory of evolution, most of the religious world rejects? Evolution is presented to the world for the first time, as an explanation of material developments until the emergence of life, and the emergence of humans, the scientific experts tend to see that this new understanding is something contrary to creation of the universe by God. Why? Especially because at the end of the nineteenth century and the first part of the twentieth century "scientism" was the one who still rule the science world. No wonder Karl Marx in this harsh climate materialist, taking the opportunity theory of evolution to write: "The creation of the earth has been shaken hard by the evolution, the science that describes the form and the earth as a process, a growth of life itself. Growth is spontaneous practical refutation only against creation theory”.
Many other materialists use evolution as a weapon to attack religion. In short time the general tendency is to look at the evolution through the narrow lens of "scientism", and thus, equalize with a form of materialism. That is why many religious believers feel the need to reject evolution, which is always interpreted as if it should be materialists and deny God. However, it is worth noting that the “dogma of ‘scientism’ was never supported by major figures in the field of exact science”. But very unfortunately, "that's something that is not recognized by most people."
But, gratefully that chaos, due to lack of philosophical reflection, has passed. Teilhard de Chardin and role in the debate was not small. However, still many people not knowing how evolution and creationism articulates each other. So the error still exists in the following form: or evolution, or creation. The dilemma is entirely fictitious. Why? Because evolution is a scientific idea, while the creation including the field of philosophical and theological. Someone who is religious and would not deny the fact of evolution is ensured by so much evidence (although how the fact of evolution took place and according to rules which were far from clear) will recognize both evolution and creation. This can be described as follows: a series of data bound to each other in an evolutionary sort of horizontal lines, each point of the line is tied to the Creator thanks to a vertical relationship. Vertical relationship is the bond of creation. There is no contradiction whatever between the two types of lines.
Evolution, Intelligibility of the Shining Mirror
But it is based on the vision of evolution and religion (especially in terms of creationism) should be added that evolution makes clearer the need for God as the Creator. “It is clear that a theist interpretation of evolution at all coherent, and even, in my opinion, it is far more convincing interpretation, from the rational and religious, rather than naturalistic interpretation, namely evolution without God Professor Emeritus Bonansea expressed the same opinion: "Concerning the doctrine of creation, not only is there no conflict between science and religion, but rather science is de facto supporting the doctrine of creation".
Why? Because this world, through evolution, reflecting an increasingly brilliant intelligibility. "The development of evolution does not take place in any direction. He lasted in the direction of a structure that plays old games.. complex, leading to a complex matter, in life and consciousness ... There is a pre-adaptation to a synthesis, a 'tendency' to integrate them in a new form, higher; in the direction of a formation. “As a result, according to Jean Doros, Professor Titularis Department of Zoology (University of Paris), he led for ten years:
“World order is the evident. Order was given to the world published by a superior power which I call God. And this is where faith meets with science. Faith that, far from being in opposition with science, in contract to complete it by a more modest understanding of the world. Preparation of the living world for a few billion years cannot be imagined without a plan, and that's why I was forced to admit the existence of a supreme power. The preparation of the world's living things cannot be understood by others. "
The whole evolution is something that “is thought". And the result is living creatures "which contains within itself a large quantity of intelligence, greater than that required to build a Cathedral. Intelligence is called" information "(which is etched in the structure of matter), but it does not change the nature of the problem. Stated Intelligence is a condition sine qua non of life. Where is that intelligence? That problem becomes interesting for both biologists, as well as for philosophers. And empirical science cannot (not competent) to solve it. Because the material itself does not think, but it is inhabited by the dynamic principle, “ideas”, organizing programs, which hold the election, selection, make calculations, and pave the way for “intelligent”, then that matter can only restore in our election, a regulator of transcendent wisdom. Thus, the universe can be seen as a kind of participation, a disclosure of the Mind and Wisdom incarnate divine transcendence. Would not this mean that so often appear in many Psalms, concerning the heavens and the earth that Enarrant Gloriam Dei? (Declare the glory of God).
Intelligibility of the universe is "an argument for the defense of theism, because it proves that behind its laws (patterns) there is a Creator Intelligence." Thus a brief opinion J. Polkinghorne, Mathematical Physics expert, lecturer at Cambridge, a member of the Royal Society, who obtained his doctorate in theology to deepen the relationship between science and religion, about the intelligibility of the universe as the Creator’s instructions.
Myth of "Coincidence"
Darwin argued that the explanation to replace the finality (the plans, projects, and goals) in the universe with a chance to explain everything, as if it shifts the creationism theory. That is a extrapolation which not only exceed the methodological limits of science, but especially something that is denied by the law of mathematics. The universe is billions and billions of times younger and less extensive to explain, through pure coincidence, the emergence of a single protein alone! However, do not deny the existence of coincidence. What is undeniable is the coincidence as a basic factor of evolution. Conversely, the finalization is so strong that, if it happened by chance a combination of positive elements of his riches, then it will use a combination of being realized. In other words, coincidence was finalized.
In his comments about the whole issue of evolution by Darwin and intellectual climate of his day coloring, MA Corey, a philosophical relationship between science and religion, wrote: "It would be foolish if denied the finality of the divine (divine teleology) just because we're about to find part of the natural tools used by God to hold the universe. In fact, characteristic teleological (finalists) world more visible again with the theory of evolution because the theory is based on natural selection (natural selection), and thus shows that the dynamism, dynamism naturalistic really determined to result in an outcome terminal natural selection (natural selection), and thus shows that dynamism-naturalistic dynamism was determined to result in an outcome as a destination terminal. "
To be added here that the same opinion of Erasmus Darwin (1731-1820), grandfather of Charles Darwin: "It could happen that the world is made step by step, based on starting points very small (very small Beginnings) via the activity of inner principles contained in material, rather than born this world at once and all of a sudden in its entirety. What a brilliant and wonderful, the idea, namely the infinite power of God, who created the causes of the results, rather than creating their own direct of after another. "
New Opinions
It is interesting to see how the flow of positive thoughts about the evolution of Christian scholars has been coloring a lot since 1920-1930, especially in philosophy and theology experts. For example, A.D. Sertillanges, Op, who are close friends with Henri Bergson, writing: “if the hypothesis of evolution is true, then God ‘proven’ twice: once through the world of its own, and once again through the evolution…if evolution does not exist-and that was the situation, then, evolution is proven, other great powers of God, His discretion also generous thanks to Him that He acts through his own work after he makes the work dynamic and power. "
Therefore, 70 years ago, evolution is not seen as a threat or an objection to creationism. Instead, mainly thanks to the influence of Teilhard de Chardin, evolution is seen as a concrete way how creation is manifested in time and space by a Creator who does not temporal and spatial dimension. Therefore, for God, “one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is equal to one day”. "The Church appreciates the natural sciences in their respective fields and does not consider them as a danger but rather as a very impressive revelation of Allah Creator" (John Paul II).
“Science can purify religion from error(error) and superstition, religion can purify science from idolatry(idolatri), and from the things that is absolutely false, Science and religion each can incorporate each other into a wider world, a world where both can flourish” (John Paul II)
Longing for your comments please!
Glossary
Sentient: a) Having sense of perception, conscious, b) experiencing sensation
Reminiscent: recalling of something in the past
Deviate: To differ or move away from an established course, way, or prescribed mode of behavior.
Fundamentalism: a) A Protestant movement holding the Bible to be the sole authority. b) A movement marked by rigid adherence to basic principles.
Exegesis: Critical interpretation or explanation of a text.
Hypothesis: Idea or suggestion used as a starting point for reasoning or explanation.
Annunciation: Announcement; proclamation.
Epiphany: when you suddenly feel that you understand, or suddenly become conscious of, something that is very important to you or a powerful religious experience.
Disaggregate: to separate, and multiply from combination
Extrapolation: to guess or think about what might happen using information that is already known
Written by Paul
No comments:
Post a Comment