Could it be?

[Spirit of Light]

Why is "I don't know" not the best answer? There is no faith involved.

Just admit, we are ignorant, don't invent a solution or say "God did it" - keep researching the problem, we may find an answer.

I do think a theist can learn a bit from looking into science, and a atheist can learn a little from looking into religious beliefs And actually many from both sides do it already.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It is not for me to present a God. The OP only ask the question

That would be my answer.

If no God, then I would say nope. Aside from evolution of course.

 

[firedragon]

If no God, then I would say nope.

IF there is no God, then how could your answer be "no"? If your premise is there is no God, then you cannot answer that question because the premise itself is not relevant to you. The question posed is a logical issue. So you can answer it with logic, if not faith, belief or lack of faith.

In my opinion, atheist or theist, one should be able to engage with logic.

 

[Altfish]

I do think a theist can learn a bit from looking into science, and a atheist can learn a little from looking into religious beliefs And actually many from both sides do it already.

I used to be a theist; so I've looked into religious beliefs and continue to do so.

 

[an anarchist]

Is it possible that our universe was created by a God, but that the theory of evolution also is true?

Meaning, did God create this universe with purpose that it evolve as a evolution on its own?

Or perhaps God created a universe that was fully evolved already with fully evolved species from the start, and since sin has entered the picture, the universe and us as a species has been devolving ever since.

 

[Eddi]

Is it possible that our universe was created by a God, but that the theory of evolution also is true?

Yes

Meaning, did God create this universe with purpose that it evolve as a evolution on its own?

Yes

 

[Link]

It is not possible (because of irreducible complexity in design of some systems).

 

[Windwalker]

Why is "I don't know" not the best answer? There is no faith involved.

Just admit, we are ignorant, don't invent a solution or say "God did it" - keep researching the problem, we may find an answer.

So you're speaking of agnosticism then, and not atheism?

 

[Jimmy]

Is it possible that our universe was created by a God, but that the theory of evolution also is true?

Meaning, did God create this universe with purpose that it evolve as a evolution on its own?

Taking into account the gravity and awesomeness of an event like the creation of all existence I would imagine it would include an already formed solar system and earth with people living on it. A creation event that just created a void would be an epic fail n my opinion. Then of course there’s always believing all of existence has always been around and always will be around. But I believe that all things end and begin again.

 

[firedragon]

Taking into account the gravity and awesomeness of an event like the creation of all existence I would imagine it would include an already formed solar system and earth with people living on it. A creation event that just created a void would be an epic fail n my opinion. Then of course there’s always believing all of existence has always been around and always will be around. But I believe that all things end and begin again.

Lets say the universe was created to be what it is today but began with a few elements, so it was not what it is today when it began, why would it be an "epic fail" in a logical sense?

 

[Jimmy]

Lets say the universe was created to be what it is today but began with a few elements, so it was not what it is today when it began, why would it be an "epic fail" in a logical sense?

I just believe an act of creation of this magnitude would go for the gold.

 

[firedragon]

I just believe an act of creation of this magnitude would go for the gold.

See, what if this "Gold" you speak of is yet to come?

 

[People_Lack_Integrity]

Is it possible that our universe was created by a God, but that the theory of evolution also is true?

Meaning, did God create this universe with purpose that it evolve as a evolution on its own?

Of course without knowledge of everything, anything can be proposed as "possible". We could all be living in a computer simulation and not be aware of it. We could all be brains in a vat sharing the same simulation. We could have all been created 5 seconds ago, with all these false memories of everything that's happened until 5 seconds ago. There's no way to disprove any of these notions as impossible....so all of them are technically possible. The real question is...is there any reason to believe any of them are true? If there's no evidence to support any of these propositions being true...what value are they to evaluating the world in which we live in? Evolution has value, because it is the cornerstone of modern biology. Evolutionary theory helps understand how viruses, bacteria and other harmful pathogens change over time and therefore we can be better prepared with vaccines. Evolution also helps us to understand mutations, genetic defects or abnormalities and diseases. It helps in the development of medical treatments and modern medicines.

What does the idea that there is a god help? It helps people feel some comfort? Well comfort can be derived in other ways that are non-religious. It sometimes motivates people to donate their money or time to charity? Well there are loads of non-religious organizations that do the same thing. Point is, there is nothing good derived from a belief in a god, that cannot be achieved through secular means. There's not one example of a good religious specific activity that can be only achieved through religion. However, if we point to bad actions that only come from religious activities....the list gets quite long.

My whole point is that the question the OP poses is rather meaningless because it asks us to consider the possible, rather than the reasonable, factual or logical. If you don't care about any of those three...then everything, including us living on a flat earth, or in the Matrix...becomes possible options.

 

[Windwalker]

I am not saying that atheists are atheists because they believe religion is hostile to science. All atheists are not so stupid. Some atheists truly do honest research, not just base everything on their indoctrinations and faith. The value of atheism is not even understood by some of these atheists.

I agree with this. I like what Sri Arubino had to say about atheism:

"It is necessary, therefore, that advancing Knowledge should base herself on a clear, pure and disciplined intellect. It is necessary, too, that she should correct her errors sometimes by a return to the restraint of sensible fact, the concrete realities of the physical world. The touch of Earth is always reinvigorating to the son of Earth, even when he seeks a supraphysical Knowledge. It may even be said that the supraphysical can only be really mastered in its fullness – to its heights we can always search– when we keep our feet firmly on the physical. “Earth is His footing,” says the Upanishad whenever it imagines the Self that manifests in the universe. And it is certainly the fact the wider we extend and the surer we make our knowledge of the physical world, the wider and surer becomes our foundation for the higher knowledge, even for the highest, even for the Brahmavidya.

In emerging, therefore, out of the materialistic period of human Knowledge we must be careful that we do not rashly condemn what we are leaving or throw away even one tittle of its gains, before we can summon perceptions and powers that are well grasped and secure, to occupy their place. Rather we shall observe with respect and wonder the work that Atheism had done for the Divine and admire the services that Agnosticism has rendered in preparing the illimitable increase of knowledge. In our world error is continually the handmaid and pathfinder of Truth; for error is really a half-truth that stumbles because of its limitations; often it is Truth that wears a disguise in order to arrive unobserved near to its goal. Well, if it could always be, as it has been in the great period we are leaving, the faithful handmaid, severe, conscientious, clean-handed, luminous within its limits, a half-truth and not a reckless and presumptuous aberration."
​

I was very specific Windwalker. There are hyper evangelical atheists. One of their main missionary weapons is evolution and when a theists says evolution is perfectly accepted, they get very agitated. This is known throughout the world in all kinds of platforms. Any evangelist, be it religious or non-religious gets agitated and uncomfortable when one of their main missionary weapons is broken at its core. Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Atheist, Alien, whatever you are, its the same.

A lot of this type of atheist probably had some background in a fundamentalist form of religion, which claimed their scriptures as the only true source of knowledge in the world to be believed and trusted. With the disillusion of their previous beliefs, they transfer that authority to science, and treat it much the same way they treated scripture before. Simply changing what one believes in, does not change how one holds and approaches those beliefs. As the saying goes, you can take the boy out of the country, but you can't take the country out of the boy.

 

[firedragon]

It helps people feel some comfort?

Are you also talking about possibilities? In that case as you said anything is possible. So if what you say is possible, then you have to consider other things also as possible, and dismiss or adopt both. Dont you think?

Some atheists in the forum argue that a belief in God has made theists to live in misery and discomfort, and you are speaking of comfort as if the God idea is a convenience for this particular purpose. Also, its irrelevant to the question whether the God idea and the theory of evolution go together. You have to approach it methodologically in my opinion.

 

[Altfish]

So you're speaking of agnosticism then, and not atheism?

Well I'm so far down the spectrum that if 100% = Atheist; 0% = God believer - I'm at 95+
So, if everything between 1% and 99% is agnostic, then yes I'm agnostic

 

[Jimmy]

See, what if this "Gold" you speak of is yet to come?

It’s gold compared to a void. You may want better but I’m content.

 

[firedragon]

I agree with this. I like what Sri Arubino had to say about atheism:

"It is necessary, therefore, that advancing Knowledge should base herself on a clear, pure and disciplined intellect. It is necessary, too, that she should correct her errors sometimes by a return to the restraint of sensible fact, the concrete realities of the physical world. The touch of Earth is always reinvigorating to the son of Earth, even when he seeks a supraphysical Knowledge. It may even be said that the supraphysical can only be really mastered in its fullness – to its heights we can always search– when we keep our feet firmly on the physical. “Earth is His footing,” says the Upanishad whenever it imagines the Self that manifests in the universe. And it is certainly the fact the wider we extend and the surer we make our knowledge of the physical world, the wider and surer becomes our foundation for the higher knowledge, even for the highest, even for the Brahmavidya.

In emerging, therefore, out of the materialistic period of human Knowledge we must be careful that we do not rashly condemn what we are leaving or throw away even one tittle of its gains, before we can summon perceptions and powers that are well grasped and secure, to occupy their place. Rather we shall observe with respect and wonder the work that Atheism had done for the Divine and admire the services that Agnosticism has rendered in preparing the illimitable increase of knowledge. In our world error is continually the handmaid and pathfinder of Truth; for error is really a half-truth that stumbles because of its limitations; often it is Truth that wears a disguise in order to arrive unobserved near to its goal. Well, if it could always be, as it has been in the great period we are leaving, the faithful handmaid, severe, conscientious, clean-handed, luminous within its limits, a half-truth and not a reckless and presumptuous aberration."
​

A lot of this type of atheist probably had some background in a fundamentalist form of religion, which claimed their scriptures as the only true source of knowledge in the world to be believed and trusted. With the disillusion of their previous beliefs, they transfer that authority to science, and treat it much the same way they treated scripture before. Simply changing what one believes in, does not change how one holds and approaches those beliefs. As the saying goes, you can take the boy out of the country, but you can't take the country out of the boy.

My opinion is different to that. But I intend not to discuss it here. Maybe in another thread.

 

[firedragon]

It’s gold compared to a void. You may want better but I’m content.

I dont mean that I want something or being content is "gold". I will change the question. The universe is expanding. So lets say the whole universe was created today, this minute, as it is right now. Tomorrow the universe will be different. So if its Gold today as you said where creation would typically "go for gold" immediately, what is tomorrow? Because it is definitely going to be very different tomorrow.

 

[Jimmy]

I dont mean that I want something or being content is "gold". I will change the question. The universe is expanding. So lets say the whole universe was created today, this minute, as it is right now. Tomorrow the universe will be different. So if its Gold today as you said where creation would typically "go for gold" immediately, what is tomorrow? Because it is definitely going to be very different tomorrow.

You’re gettin a little too deep here I think. Keep it simple