Updated: Feb 24, 2020
Published Mar 24, 2014
I just want to see how people feel about evolution on the nursing community. This is no way bashing thread. I just want to see if any people choose not to believe in evolution and be in nursing
Pangea Reunited, ASN, RN
I don't believe in evolution or creation.
I believe in both.
There are many, many nurses who believe in evolution......atheist and Christian.....quite a few that I know personally. Evolution and creationism are not exclusive though, many people believe in both, and frankly, evolution is the most rational explanation for why life is what it is now. Most people that completely reject evolution really don't understand it. It does not claim that "we came from monkeys" and it deals with a time frame that we literally cannot wrap our minds around.
This does kind of seem like a loaded question though.......does it not make sense to you that someone could believe in it and still be a good nurse?
I believe in creation only.
Evolution is scientifically proven. It was either that, or aliens;)
Whether or not I believe in Intelligent Design, I allow for the possibility of some of evolution being possible. But what I find completely unbelievable is Abiogenesis. I find no credibility to the idea that life began from nonliving material. That idea was disproved almost 200 years ago by Louis Pasteur.
(This post was intended to express my own opinion and not to discredit or bash anybody else's opinion)
Here.I.Stand, BSN, RN
I'm a Christian who believes the Bible to be the infallible, inerrant word of God--beginning w/ Genesis 1:1. Actually the more science I learned, the less sense evolution made. Take irreducible complexity...we have so many intricacies that have to ALL work together for us to live, from organ systems to cells. So many things would have HAD to evolved at the same time... Heart, vasculature, blood, lungs to oxygenate the blood, respiratory system connected to the lungs... 12 clotting factors and a coagulation cascade so that our blood clots when it needs to AND flows freely when it needs to. The nervous system w/ its sensory and motor functions, which works WITH SEPARATE sensory organs to allow us to see, hear, smell, taste, and touch. I could go on and on all day... but those are just some examples of things that would have had to evolve together for there to even be a survival of the fittest...and then in males AND females, at the same time, so that reproduction could occur. And in how many species alive on the planet today... Statistically, the likelihood of that happening is zero. A creator seems much more plausible an explanation. :)
Nursing doesn't really deal w/ origins though. Was I in the minority in my science classes? Sure. But the science that you have to learn for nursing is purely empirical. Knowledge that we know to be true b/c we can observe it, can reproduce it. I don't think any philosophy of origins really affects one's ability to be a good nurse, or makes one a bad nurse. I personally am fascinated by the Creator's work though. :)
emtb2rn said:1. Written by whom? Was it dictated verbatim? Ever play telephone?2. You're referencing Behe? That argument has been refuted many times.
2. You're referencing Behe? That argument has been refuted many times.
I don't know who Behe is; this was my own conclusion that I came to during patho class. I'd already taken A&P I and II...and I might add, aced all of them while working and having a baby in the middle of the semester. I'm not a simpleton. But anyway, I heard the term "irreducible complexity" later. I'll read the article later in more depth, if I have time; I just scanned it, and I still fail to see how interlocking complexities could have ALL evolved at the same time. It doesn't make statistical sense if we are looking at a purely natural process.
Christians believe the books and letters collectively known as the Bible were given to human writers under God's inspiration. This was done over a time span of a millennium and a half, through over 40 men from HUGELY different walks of life, and all agrees with itself. Archaeology doesn't prove the Bible, but in many case supports it and has never contradicted it.
It's also interesting to note that it touches on scientific tidbits that were not known at the time, but have since been empirically proven. Job describes the earth as being "hung on nothing," Isaiah describes the earth as round--hundreds of years before the earth as flat debate (yes, I know theologians were on the wrong side of that debate in Galileo's day...but they didn't get their position from the Bible ). Job describes the hydrologic cycle: "For he draws up the drops of water, they distill his mist in the rain, which the skies pour down and drop on man abundantly" long before the development of meteorology. The book of Job also, quoting God (yes, I believe God used to speak audibly in a way that He doesn't now--Hebrews 1) in a dialogue between the two, describes an animal Behemoth that sounds a lot like a sauropod (Brontosaurus type) dinosaur...tail like a cedar, bones like tubes of bronze, limbs like iron, plant eating, "first of the works of God" (meaning greatest, grandest), seeking shade from trees in the marshes, able to withstand a turbulent river. That was obviously long before any of those guys were dug up, and I'm not aware of any modern animal that fits that description.
Less-ancient manuscripts of Biblical texts are very similar to more ancient ones; no differences are there that change their meaning. The differences are ancient equivalents of typos, if you will. Not at ALL like a game of telephone. A game of Scriptural telephone would yield a result like "This is not the first world or first universe. There have been and will be many more worlds and universes. These are created by..." becoming "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."
In any case, the OP asked a question and I responded to it...in the Nursing and Spirituality forum. I don't have a lot of time to go back and forth with people who just want to compare Yahweh to the Flying Spaghetti Monster and compare Christians to followers of the FSM. So I'm not going to continue this debate, but hope I answered your question! ?
Your own personal beliefs are your business. Discussing your beliefs in the work place is inappropriate and has nothing to do with your job. Yes I do believe in evolution, to answer the question.
Spidey's mom, ADN, BSN, RN
Here.I.Stand . . . I want to say I appreciate your polite and detailed answer to the OP's question. This isn't really a debate question as indicated by the OP. He/she is just wondering.
Personally, anatomy, physiology and microbiology cemented my belief in God.
Of course this doesn't have much to do with my role as a nurse. I don't pontificate to patients about my beliefs. Not appropriate.
emtb2rn, BSN, RN, EMT-B
I will stick to the thread. I believe in evolution only.
Create well-written care plans that meets your patient's health goals.
This study guide will help you focus your time on what's most important.
Choosing a specialty can be a daunting task and we made it easier.
By using the site, you agree with our Policies. X