Evolution, violence and the existence of God

[URAVIP2ME]

reply to post # 100

True Bob, it is Not your fault my 'biblical' view prevents me from seeing 'your' reality.
What I am posting to the best of my ability is What the Bible Really Teaches.
Mankind will see that God is ' both able and willing ' when 'they' (powers that be) will be saying, "Peace and Security" which will be the 'final signal', so to speak, as a precursor to the coming great tribulation or Revelation 7:14.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

reply to post # 100

True Bob, it is Not your fault my 'biblical' view prevents me from seeing 'your' reality.
What I am posting to the best of my ability is What the Bible Really Teaches.
Mankind will see that God is ' both able and willing ' when 'they' (powers that be) will be saying, "Peace and Security" which will be the 'final signal', so to speak, as a precursor to the coming great tribulation or Revelation 7:14.

Who died and put YOU in charge of what the bible supposedly said or does not say?

Seriously: I'd like a serious answer to this. You presume much, in the above statement. You assume I cannot read it for myself.

You also take on the role of Expert. Who gave you that authority? I'd love to see the credentials of whoever that is.

If you cannot produce such an authority? Then? My take on the bible is just as valid as yours. Since there is not over-arching authority to contradict either you OR me.

 

[Looncall]

Perhaps it could be said that in lower forms of life that God used some sort of evolution.
As far as humans are concerned there was No evolution involved in the creation of Adam - Genesis 2:7.
There was No violence in the paradisical Garden of Eden.
After sinners Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden, then we see violence in their son Cain.
So, violence developed ( Not evolved ) after Adam passed down his acquired sinful nature to his offsprings.

Since there was No violence in Eden, then to me that shows God did Not purpose for violence on Earth.
Adam was created with upright or righteous/ leanings. Adam lost his uprightness when he broke God's Law.
So, then father Adam could only pass on to us his imperfect leanings toward /wrongdoing to us.
People who choose to lean toward wrongdoing can then lean toward violence, Nothing to do with evolution.
Rather, it has to do with people's free-will choices to, like father Adam, break God's Laws such as breaking the Golden Rule, and choosing Not to keep Jesus' New commandment to have self-sacrificing love for others as he did according to John 13:34-35.

However, there is no evidence that the Genesis account is more than an ancient folk tale. I don't think you are justified in arguing from a story that may very well not have happened at all.

Genesis is a very powerful part of the Great Scam of the clerics, though.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

However, there is no evidence that the Genesis account is more than an ancient folk tale. I don't think you are justified in arguing from a story that may very well not have happened at all.
Genesis is a very powerful part of the Great Scam of the clerics, though.

Sure, I can agree that 'clerics' use Genesis as a Great Scam.
Just as Jesus' said MANY would come ' in his name ' but prove false at Matthew 7:21-23.
One Catholic told me Genesis is just a child's story and because of the missing link evolution is real.
Clerics also teach a literal 24-hour creation day when in Genesis it does Not say how long each creative day was or even if each creative day was of the same length of time or differing lengths of time.
After all, all of the creative days are summed up by the ' day ' at Genesis 2:4, so ' day ' is used in a relative sense.
Just as we might speak of grandfather's day and we know we are Not talking about a 24-hour day.

Doesn't it seem odd if there was No great deluge that throughout earth's nations and islands they have a common Flood account about few survivors as part of their history.

 

[Jose Fly]

If there was enough water on the earth to flood the earth, the earth would be flooded. That fact that the entire earth is not flooded right now shows there's not enough water to do it. That means in order to flood the earth, you'd have to bring in water from somewhere else and then get rid of it.

Obviously that's not feasible.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Doesn't it seem odd if there was No great deluge that throughout earth's nations and islands they have a common Flood account about few survivors as part of their history.

If the biblical story were correct, nobody would have lived to tell of it but the family of Noah.

Flood stories are probably fairly universal because most cultures have found sea shells on mountaintops. It would seem much likelier to the ancients that the sea rose up above the mountains than that the sea floors rose up and were made into mountains.

 

[Looncall]

Sure, I can agree that 'clerics' use Genesis as a Great Scam.
Just as Jesus' said MANY would come ' in his name ' but prove false at Matthew 7:21-23.
One Catholic told me Genesis is just a child's story and because of the missing link evolution is real.
Clerics also teach a literal 24-hour creation day when in Genesis it does Not say how long each creative day was or even if each creative day was of the same length of time or differing lengths of time.
After all, all of the creative days are summed up by the ' day ' at Genesis 2:4, so ' day ' is used in a relative sense.
Just as we might speak of grandfather's day and we know we are Not talking about a 24-hour day.

Doesn't it seem odd if there was No great deluge that throughout earth's nations and islands they have a common Flood account about few survivors as part of their history.

It doesn't seem odd at all. People necessarily live near water and so are likely to have folk tales about floods.

In any case, a global flood as recent as the Noachian one would leave easily-detected traces. None such are found, therefore no such flood happened. Reality does trump myth, after all. It seems perverse to prefer the campfire yarns of ignorant savages over modern science.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

It doesn't seem odd at all. People necessarily live near water and so are likely to have folk tales about floods.
In any case, a global flood as recent as the Noachian one would leave easily-detected traces. None such are found, therefore no such flood happened...........................

Then what is the structure found on Mount Ararat.

Yes, there are folk tales, but the fact that what nations and islands have in common is that only a few survived as with the Noachian account.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

If the biblical story were correct, nobody would have lived to tell of it but the family of Noah.
Flood stories are probably fairly universal because most cultures have found sea shells on mountaintops. It would seem much likelier to the ancients that the sea rose up above the mountains than that the sea floors rose up and were made into mountains.

The Flood waters could have contributed to the rising up of mountains.
What is the huge structure on Mount Ararat.
Yes, Noah and family would have passed down the Flood account to their children, children's children and so forth.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

If there was enough water on the earth to flood the earth, the earth would be flooded. That fact that the entire earth is not flooded right now shows there's not enough water to do it. That means in order to flood the earth, you'd have to bring in water from somewhere else and then get rid of it.
Obviously that's not feasible.

For the sake of illustration if you had a flat surface and covered it with water then all of it would be covered.
If that flat surface No longer remained flat but buckled up, or raised up, then there would be areas above the water.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Who died and put YOU in charge of what the bible supposedly said or does not say?
Seriously: I'd like a serious answer to this. You presume much, in the above statement. You assume I cannot read it for myself.
You also take on the role of Expert. Who gave you that authority? I'd love to see the credentials of whoever that is.
If you cannot produce such an authority? Then? My take on the bible is just as valid as yours. Since there is not over-arching authority to contradict either you OR me.

I did Not say your take on the Bible is Not a valid take, and sure you can read the Bible for yourself.
What is your take on 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3

 

[Jose Fly]

For the sake of illustration if you had a flat surface and covered it with water then all of it would be covered.
If that flat surface No longer remained flat but buckled up, or raised up, then there would be areas above the water.

Except the earth was not flat less than 5,000 years ago. And you can't go from a flat earth to one that looks like today's in a period of a few years or even a few thousand, without making the earth completely uninhabitable.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Doesn't it seem odd if there was No great deluge that throughout earth's nations and islands they have a common Flood account about few survivors as part of their history.

No. Any culture that lives near large bodies of water, have flood-survival stories.

And?

Cultures that do not live near such? Do not have flood stories.


This isn't hard to figure out-- you are painting something that simply isn't there-- the flood absolutely did not happen. The rocks alone, prove this to 100%. But-- DNA also prove it.

And even more? Oriental cultures exist--- no flood-- beyond the dates required by your myth. Proof-positive: the flood never happened as described in Genesis.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Then what is the structure found on Mount Ararat.

A money-making hoax. NEXT!

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I did Not say your take on the Bible is Not a valid take, and sure you can read the Bible for yourself.
What is your take on 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3

A very simple observation that nomadic Bronze Age goat-herders will be oppressed by larger tribes at some point in their history?

Heck-- *I* could write such "prophecy" simply by studying human behaviors.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I did Not say your take on the Bible is Not a valid take,

False. You absolutely said that, when you contradicted me with your post which said the exact opposite of what I said....

 

[arthra]

I know this is an usual topic but I`m new over here. So let your ideas flow on this thread

Welcome Nirvana to the Forum! and what a well chosen name you have! So under the topic
"Evolution, violence and the existence of God"...

My initial response follows... there's nothing in my Faith that suggests any contradiction between God and evolution...

"...as man in the womb of the mother passes from form to form, from shape to shape, changes and develops, and is still the human species from the beginning of the embryonic period -- in the same way man, from the beginning of his existence in the matrix of the world, is also a distinct species, that is, man, and has gradually evolved from one form to another."

~ Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - p. 308

As to violence... when Abdul-Baha was in London around 1911 He was reported to have said the following:

"A Bahá'í denies no religion; he accepts the Truth in all, and would die to uphold it. He loves all men as his brothers, of whatever class, of whatever race or nationality, of whatever creed or colour, whether good or bad, rich or poor, beautiful or hideous. He commits no violence; if he is struck he does not return the blow."

~ Abdu'l-Baha, Abdu'l-Baha in London, p. 56

 

[Looncall]

Then what is the structure found on Mount Ararat.

Yes, there are folk tales, but the fact that what nations and islands have in common is that only a few survived as with the Noachian account.

I gather that the shape on Mt Ararat has been debunked. Anyhow, a global flood would leave global traces. There are none, so no such flood.

No amount of intellectual tap dancing can rescue Genesis. To me, the whole thing looks like a ploy by clerics to inflict morbid guilt and dependence on the clerics.

 

[Nirvana]

Welcome Nirvana to the Forum! and what a well chosen name you have! So under the topic
"Evolution, violence and the existence of God"...

My initial response follows... there's nothing in my Faith that suggests any contradiction between God and evolution...

"...as man in the womb of the mother passes from form to form, from shape to shape, changes and develops, and is still the human species from the beginning of the embryonic period -- in the same way man, from the beginning of his existence in the matrix of the world, is also a distinct species, that is, man, and has gradually evolved from one form to another."

~ Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - p. 308

As to violence... when Abdul-Baha was in London around 1911 He was reported to have said the following:

"A Bahá'í denies no religion; he accepts the Truth in all, and would die to uphold it. He loves all men as his brothers, of whatever class, of whatever race or nationality, of whatever creed or colour, whether good or bad, rich or poor, beautiful or hideous. He commits no violence; if he is struck he does not return the blow."

~ Abdu'l-Baha, Abdu'l-Baha in London, p. 56

Thanks!! I have never heard of this perspective, so its surprising and enlightening. I should check out your religion. I dont really know much about it...

 

[sayak83]

I know this is an usual topic but I`m new over here. So let your ideas flow on this thread

In Hinduism, all that exists is an outcome of successive diversification of one thing into a multiplicity of forms, shapes and functions over time. This is said to occur both cosmologically and biologically. It also believes in an extremely old and possibly cyclical universe where entities diversify and then dissolve back and so on. Hindu creation stories are many and divergent as an objective account is not what is being offered but this principle of staged diversification. The idea appears to be broadly compatible with scientific accounts. In fact if Hindu philosophy is true then

1) The idea that all life comes from one root life form is overwhelmingly probable.
2)The idea that all material "stuff" are various permutations of one fundamental substance must be true. Same all laws from one fundamental law.
3)The universe will have a "prior" universe.


Evolution itself will be seen as an aspect of the broader laws of karma, where laws of action and consequence acting over eons through generations of living things shapes and reshapes the material vessels of life.

Suffering is the inevitable result of being caught up in the flow of change. Change means arising, growth, decay and dissolution. A creative universe must have change. Hinduism seeks to make people realise the necessary inevitably of change and to act in an unattached fashion so that suffering does not occur.