5 billion years ago. God created the first cell, and then used evolution as a tool to guide the development of each new species." (Robinson, Evolution, 1995) This is an interesting concept, but does not signify that the progression of nature has a moral message from God to humans. Naturalistic evolution is the same as theistic evolution, but proposes that God had no hand in it. (Robinson, Evolution, 1995).
One might inquire why Darwin never used the word evolution to describe his theory. "Evolution," from the Latin evolvere, literally means, "An unrolling"--and clearly implies an unfolding in time of a predictable or prepackaged sequence in an inherently progressive, or at least directional, manner." (Gould, History, 2000) Stephan Gould stated, "Darwin would not use a word that meant progress, especially when he was trying very hard to separate the mechanism from the common social belief, the psychological hope, the desire of everyone, to equate this process with progress." (Gould, Revolution, 1995) .
Creationists persist that since inhabitants were not around as witnesses, evolution is still just a supposition. According to Gould, the feud between science and religion is nonsensical because the two play in different ballparks-they address fundamentally different issues. Tribulations surface when people try to switch playing fields by using science to substantiate religious conviction, or vice versa. "By insisting that the Bible is a bona fide biology/geology/physics textbook, creationists cause needless dissension. What scientists believe and believe in (the latter implying faith rather than reason) is irrelevant. In other words, live and let live. Gould sees no conflict between evolution and religion, if only we compartmentalize." (Palevistz, 2000).
Gould also asks why such cruelty exists in nature if God is so benevolent. He says there is not any answer. That it is not even an appropriate question to ask.
