Evolution & Creation: What if God made Evolution?

[Gyrannon]

Seriously, say God made Evolution, left things to chance, and what came out on top is His creation.

Would it be such a bad thing if both sides were to accept that possibility? No one knows how we or anything was made. Did God leave specific notes about how he created everything? Course not.

The only bit about Religion vs Science is neither side knows an there's a definitive chance that God made Science and INTENTIONALLY made it easy for Science to play against him.
If we automatically just knew, there'd be no point in discovery.

 

[Deathbydefault]

Seriously, say God made Evolution, left things to chance, and what came out on top is His creation.

Would it be such a bad thing if both sides were to accept that possibility? No one knows how we or anything was made. Did God leave specific notes about how he created everything? Course not.

The only bit about Religion vs Science is neither side knows an there's a definitive chance that God made Science and INTENTIONALLY made it easy for Science to play against him.
If we automatically just knew, there'd be no point in discovery.

Is this god you speak of omnipotent and omniscient?

 

[Gyrannon]

Yeah, the God who is just simply known as "God" or "Heavenly Father".

Creationism is mostly associated with that God, personally haven't heard of other different religions jumping into this debate.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Seriously, say God made Evolution, left things to chance, and what came out on top is His creation.

Why would God have done that? Was he bored or something?

 

[Gyrannon]

Why did God bother to create anything? Boredom would probably be the 1st reason for any infinitely powerful being who (as mentioned in the bible) is all alone.

 

[Deathbydefault]

Yeah, the God who is just simply known as "God" or "Heavenly Father".

Creationism is mostly associated with that God, personally haven't heard of other different religions jumping into this debate.

Alright, if this god is all knowing and all powerful, it planted the seeds for evolution knowing exactly what was going to happen.
This action transcends sadism, it is the most evil thing I've ever heard of, but that's besides the point.

Whether it did something like this or not is irrelevant, mainly because we can not show that it did.
This hypothetical belongs more in the philosophy section, imo.

 

[Godobeyer]

Seriously, say God made Evolution, left things to chance, and what came out on top is His creation.

Would it be such a bad thing if both sides were to accept that possibility? No one knows how we or anything was made. Did God leave specific notes about how he created everything? Course not.

The only bit about Religion vs Science is neither side knows an there's a definitive chance that God made Science and INTENTIONALLY made it easy for Science to play against him.
If we automatically just knew, there'd be no point in discovery.

Millions of species could NOT appears with "evolution" as starter of life, VERY certainty there was smart starter/planner.

 

[Gyrannon]

Millions of species could NOT appears with "evolution" as starter of life, VERY certainty there was smart starter/planner.

So God being the creator who could be the one who made Evolution, that sounds ridiculous? How? Why?
If God is capable of anything, what could be wrong in accepting the possibility that he made Evolution?

Also, my argument is that they are both the same. God creating evolution, he can still say "I created you" even if he left it all to chance.

 

[Godobeyer]

So God being the creator who could be the one who made Evolution, that sounds ridiculous? How? Why?
If God is capable of anything, what could be wrong in accepting the possibility that he made Evolution?

Also, my argument is that they are both the same. God creating evolution, he can still say "I created you" even if he left it all to chance.

what do you mean by "evolution" 1- changes of body during a period of time or 2- change from specie to another ?

 

[Gyrannon]

Evolution is based on chance and chaotic selection; no intelligent design.
But I'm wondering why can't God have just decided, "I'm gonna leave everything to chance"?

In all honesty, it doesn't really matter what comes out on top, cause whatever that species is, God can still say he created them. And God can simply add "Souls" to that species based on their genetic template.
If nothing is beyond God, then neither is Evolution.

 

[leibowde84]

Seriously, say God made Evolution, left things to chance, and what came out on top is His creation.

Would it be such a bad thing if both sides were to accept that possibility? No one knows how we or anything was made. Did God leave specific notes about how he created everything? Course not.

The only bit about Religion vs Science is neither side knows an there's a definitive chance that God made Science and INTENTIONALLY made it easy for Science to play against him.
If we automatically just knew, there'd be no point in discovery.

I would say that, while it is foolish to claim this as impossible without evidence, it is equally to accept this as definitely being the case without evidence.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Why did God bother to create anything? Boredom would probably be the 1st reason ...

On the contrary, human emotion "would probably be" the last thing I'd expect from preternatural agency.

Seriously, say God made Evolution, left things to chance, and what came out on top is His creation.

OK

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You could say that evolution made God. Evolution "made" man, and man "made" God.

So that's that sorted out then.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Seriously, say God made Evolution, left things to chance, and what came out on top is His creation.

Would it be such a bad thing if both sides were to accept that possibility? No one knows how we or anything was made. Did God leave specific notes about how he created everything? Course not.

The only bit about Religion vs Science is neither side knows an there's a definitive chance that God made Science and INTENTIONALLY made it easy for Science to play against him.
If we automatically just knew, there'd be no point in discovery.

Are we going to explicitly accept God as a possible cause in every other instance ("why did my toaster work fine yesterday but burn my toast today?" "Until you check for a wiring fault, stay open to the possibility that God did it.")? If not, why explicitly assume this for evolution specifically?

Are you going to explicitly accept other things with as much justification as possible causes of evolution (e.g. time travel or magic pixies)? If not, why single out God?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The only bit about Religion vs Science is neither side knows an there's a definitive chance that God made Science and INTENTIONALLY made it easy for Science to play against him.
If we automatically just knew, there'd be no point in discovery.

... because every time scientists go looking for God, he hides his existence by manipulating their instruments with a noodly appendage?

 

[Godobeyer]

Evolution is based on chance and chaotic selection; no intelligent design.
But I'm wondering why can't God have just decided, "I'm gonna leave everything to chance"?

In all honesty, it doesn't really matter what comes out on top, cause whatever that species is, God can still say he created them. And God can simply add "Souls" to that species based on their genetic template.
If nothing is beyond God, then neither is Evolution.

No intelligent design : is the most denial of facts that I faced here in RF,it's just describe as mental suicide by Dr Adnan Ibrahim.

 

[rusra02]

Seriously, say God made Evolution, left things to chance, and what came out on top is His creation.

Would it be such a bad thing if both sides were to accept that possibility? No one knows how we or anything was made. Did God leave specific notes about how he created everything? Course not.

The only bit about Religion vs Science is neither side knows an there's a definitive chance that God made Science and INTENTIONALLY made it easy for Science to play against him.
If we automatically just knew, there'd be no point in discovery.

I believe God did inform us in sufficient detail for us to know he did not use macro evolution to create the stunning variety of life that fills the earth. Of man in particular, the Bible reveals he was created, not evolved. (Genesis 2:7)

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe God did inform us in sufficient detail for us to know he did not use macro evolution to create the stunning variety of life that fills the earth. Of man in particular, the Bible reveals he was created, not evolved. (Genesis 2:7)

You're relying on a book that says that plants existed on Earth before the Sun for scientific conclusions?

 

[rusra02]

You're relying on a book that says that plants existed on Earth before the Sun for scientific conclusions?

That is not what the Bible really says, of course. It was long before the first creative period, or "day", that God created the heavens (including our sun) and the earth. (Genesis 1:1) During the first creative day, Jehovah made light from the sun shine on earth's surface, previously shrouded in darknes. It was on the fourth day that the expanse or atmosphere cleared up sufficiently for the light sources themselves to be seen on earth. "Then God said: “Let there be luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night, and they will serve as signs for seasons and for days and years. They will serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth.” And it was so." (Genesis 1:14,15) I believe prior to the fourth creative epoch, diffused light from the sun was sufficient to allow for the plant life Jehovah created on the third creative day, although the source of that light could not be seen on earth until later.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That is not what the Bible really says, of course. It was long before the first creative period, or "day", that God created the heavens (including our sun) and the earth. (Genesis 1:1) During the first creative day, Jehovah made light from the sun shine on earth's surface, previously shrouded in darknes. It was on the fourth day that the expanse or atmosphere cleared up sufficiently for the light sources themselves to be seen on earth. "Then God said: “Let there be luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night, and they will serve as signs for seasons and for days and years. They will serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth.” And it was so." (Genesis 1:14,15) I believe prior to the fourth creative epoch, diffused light from the sun was sufficient to allow for the plant life Jehovah created on the third creative day, although the source of that light could not be seen on earth until later.

Why did you cut off your quote right before it says that God created the stars on the fourth day as well?

While you get full marks for imagination, I don't think your interpretation works in the context of the whole passage:

14 God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them be signs to indicate seasons and days and years,15 and let them serve as lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.” It was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to rule over the day and the lesser light to rule over the night. He made the stars also. 17 God placed the lights in the expanse of the sky to shine on the earth, 18 to preside over the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. God saw that it was good. 19 There was evening, and there was morning, a fourth day.

"Placing lights in the expanse of the sky" sure doesn't sound like mere removal of fog.