How can you accept evolution and still have a spiritual reality, and/or a God faith

[Etritonakin]

If that were true then Christians would all agree. They don't. Some believe all of Genesis is absolute truth. Some believe all of Genesis is allegory. Many are between.

So, yes, it's all about interpretation. Probably interpretation based on various levels of credulity.

Not at all would they all agree even if the bible were perfectly clear on all points (it actually states that it is purposefully NOT so). Interpretation is definitely an issue -as opposed to referencing verses with each other (line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, there a little as it says) -but there are many other issues.

Even if all knowledge about everything was available and clearly stated, it would still be subject to how we dealt with it based on a great many factors.

The same is true when considering and discussing purely scientific matters. There is what it is -and there is everything else.

 

[exchemist]

Thanks, I did not know that science with evolution in the west was so exclusive, leaving no room for God. Kind of dumb though IMHO, as I already explained. I was long time in India, and there they have "evolution" and "God or spiritual aspect to the universe" combined. Seems that India and spirituality has been my way to go all along.

InChrist has got it wrong, actually. Evolution does not preclude God. It is just some sects of Christianity that think so.

 

[stvdv]

26 jun 2018 stvdv 013 17

When I do make something and it goes wrong I do not tend to accuse what I made, as God did in the Garden of Eden myth

Wonderful point, I fully agree. I think all responsible people agree, they should IMO. If parents mess up their child, the child can't be blamed to be messed up. So if God created humans + in His Image, you proved here that God never judges us. So big fault in the Bible, which states, according to Christians, that God will judge us or a big fault in the writing down of genesis Garden of Eden story or both even. Take your pick I would say to the Christians.

I see that logic is not in your toolbox. God made Adam and Eve without the knowledge of right and wrong

That is exactly how I also read these verses.

When you make a creation with that lack one can't blame the creation for doing wrong.

Myth or not, and despite what you believe it to say, the book does clearly say God told them right from wrong.
Gen 2:16-17,

16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.​

It is highly illogical to claim God did not tell them right from wrong in light of these simple to read verses. You may not believe the verses of course, but that doesn't change the fact that they do say God instructed Adam and Eve in right and wrong. I don't know how else they could be read. If you are going to make clams about the Bible at least make sure you read it first.

@Subduction Zone clearly stated "God made Adam and Eve without the knowledge of right and wrong". So if you now claim "God told them right from wrong" you proved his point. So if God told them, then they were created without this knowledge. Generally God, being all knowing, should not forget His first batch [which parent forgets His first child anyway]. I guess you won't imply God is suffering amnesia or dementia and that made him forget whether or not he implanted the knowledge in His first child.

I don't even know where this is going. But like you said "If you are going to make claims about the Bible at least make sure you read it first" is a good suggestion

 

[stvdv]

26 jun 2018 stvdv 013 18

InChrist has got it wrong, actually. Evolution does not preclude God. It is just some sects of Christianity that think so.

Thank you. Yes, that seems to be the biggest problem all along. Those sect members seem to know what other people think very well, even better then those people themselves. As if they are all a kind of magicians, being able to read into the soul and mind of the other person, which is a bit strange, because the same sects heavily curse magicians. Maybe that was exactly why Jesus advices "Judge not", it just confuses everything too much. Best is to let people think for themselves. Avoids lots of problems.

Personally I think this Evolution theory makes things easier. Mostly because there are not 1000 denominations of Evolution-believers [at least as far as I know].

 

[jac]

As a person with a degree in engineering and having a INTJ personality I would say I look to logic. I dislike it when supposed scientist say that macro evolution is a fact when it cannot be proved, tested or replicated. Changes within species, yes that happens but the monkey to man type of evolution nope. Evolution and the bible do not agree. Belief in either one takes faith but you have to decide where your faith is going to take you. People that are bible believing Christians but still maintain a belief in evolution are not being honest with themselves. When I look at the facts and realize what we do not know I have to go with God and the bible.

 

[exchemist]

As a person with a degree in engineering and having a INTJ personality I would say I look to logic. I dislike it when supposed scientist say that macro evolution is a fact when it cannot be proved, tested or replicated. Changes within species, yes that happens but the monkey to man type of evolution nope. Evolution and the bible do not agree. Belief in either one takes faith but you have to decide where your faith is going to take you. People that are bible believing Christians but still maintain a belief in evolution are not being honest with themselves. When I look at the facts and realize what we do not know I have to go with God and the bible.

What makes you say that evolution and the bible do not agree?

 

[Subduction Zone]

As a person with a degree in engineering and having a INTJ personality I would say I look to logic. I dislike it when supposed scientist say that macro evolution is a fact when it cannot be proved, tested or replicated. Changes within species, yes that happens but the monkey to man type of evolution nope. Evolution and the bible do not agree. Belief in either one takes faith but you have to decide where your faith is going to take you. People that are bible believing Christians but still maintain a belief in evolution are not being honest with themselves. When I look at the facts and realize what we do not know I have to go with God and the bible.

What makes you think that it can't be tested? And no, it only takes faith to understand the Bible. To accept evolution only takes understanding of the concept of evidence.

What level of science classed did you take at college? I went to a large university and even when I was taking courses outside of my major I still took the course aimed at majors in those sciences (except for one "modern physics" class that dealt with relativity and quantum dynamics for non-majors which confirmed my previous prejudice).

I have a thread started on the scientific method and scientific evidence. Perhaps it is time for a refresher course. Or even an introduction to those ideas. I have yet to meet a creationist that understands those concepts.

 

[neologist]

Everyone picks and chooses what parts of their holy scripture are fact or myth.

Hmm.
I suppose that would apply to the processes labeled as evolution.

Natural selection is easily observed. But minis don't necessarily mean macros.

 

[blü 2]

Myth or not, and despite what you believe it to say, the book does clearly say God told them right from wrong.

Gen 2:16-17,

16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.​

Read that again. It's not a right / wrong question, it's a warning, like, Don't run through the briars barefoot.

Moreover, the text is unambiguous about when Adam and Eve gained knowledge of good and evil: AFTER and AS A RESULT of eating the fruit. First, the snake correctly informs Eve (Genesis 3),

4 'You will not die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good from evil.'​

And what happens?

6 [...] she took the fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both were opened [...]
​

So up to that moment, AFTER they'd eaten the fruit, they had NOT had knowledge of good and evil; and thus when they ate the fruit, they were incapable of forming an intention to sin; and thus they were incapable of sin.

Moreover, nowhere in the Garden story is there any mention of sin, original sin, disobedience, the fall of man, death entering the world, spiritual death or the need for a redeemer. They're never mentioned. (They're an attempted retrofit from later centuries, but if you read the text, a failed one.)

Moreover, God is very specific as to why [he] drove them out of the Garden, and it has nothing to do with sin, disobedience, and so on: [he] says (and this is the ONLY reason he gives):

3:22 "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"─ therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden.
​

(That also directly contradicts any notion that death entered the world as a result of eating the fruit. Instead it says that Adam and Eve were always going to die.)

Also, if you read Ezekiel 18 you'll see that there can be no original sin, that sin can't be inherited: to take just one example:

20 The soul that sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.​

 

[Subduction Zone]

Hmm.
I suppose that would apply to the processes labeled as evolution.

Natural selection is easily observed. But minis don't necessarily mean macros.

Macro evolution is observed in the fossil record. It is also observable in DNA. And of course macroevolution has been observed to occur directly, though very few creationists understand what the word macroevolution means.

 

[rrobs]

Your omniscient god knew, for all of eternity, that if He created God in the manner He did, that they would choose to disobey Him.

Yes. That's why He add plan "B" ready to go. Pretty smart guy!

Do you believe your God is omniscient?

Who cares what I believe? Check the scriptures themselves if you want to know about God. It's all there.

 

[stvdv]

27 jun 2018 stvdv 013 23

Who cares what I believe? Check the scriptures themselves if you want to know about God. It's all there.

That is very true. I studied the Hindu scriptures and found all my answers about God there

 

[Deeje]

Someone started a new thread to "educate" me on science...and evolution...

I'll probably get to it tomorrow. I'm sure I'll share my views and be called ignorant there as well. Pop some popcorn - see ya there.

 

[rrobs]

Moreover, nowhere in the Garden story is there any mention of sin, original sin, disobedience, the fall of man, death entering the world, spiritual death or the need for a redeemer. They're never mentioned. (They're an attempted retrofit from later centuries, but if you read the text, a failed one.)

Holy cow! What else in the Bible is a retrofit? Seems like a serious student of the scriptures ought to know which parts to discard. If you're right I don't blame you for being skeptical.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Holy cow! What else in the Bible is a retrofit? Seems like a serious student of the scriptures ought to know which parts to discard. If you're right I don't blame you for being skeptical.

A serious student takes into account reality. Which would mean one would start with discarding literal interpretations of the first two books of the Bible at the very least.

 

[rrobs]

The Bible says that God screwed up and then blamed his creation if you take Genesis literally.

Can you be more specific? Which part when taken literally blames God for the free will decision Adam made? I always thought Adam made the mistake.

I also thought Genesis 1:26 said God gave dominion over the earth.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.​

What am I missing here?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Can you be more specific? Which part when taken literally blames God for the free will decision Adam made? I always thought Adam made the mistake.

I also thought Genesis 1:26 said God gave dominion over the earth.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.​

What am I missing here?

Yes, Adam made a mistake but that was due to God's poor design. He left out the ability to understand right from wrong in the myth.

Then when man screwed up he punished them for his error.

 

[rrobs]

A serious student takes into account reality. Which would mean one would start with discarding literal interpretations of the first two books of the Bible at the very least.

OK. We'll discard Genesis and Exodus. How about John 3:16? Is that still valid?

I never liked that stupid idea of not being able to kill someone else if I don't like them. Maybe we could get rid of that useless commandment that forbids murder. Unless maybe you think God that part right. If you want to, we'll keep it. I'll leave it up to you.

Can you think of anything else in the Bible you want to change or delete?

 

[rrobs]

Yes, Adam made a mistake but that was due to God's poor design. He left out the ability to understand right from wrong in the myth.

Then when man screwed up he punished them for his error.

Just like you severely punished your child for putting his hand in the fire after you explained to him how bad it would hurt?

You could have tied your child to the bed so he wouldn't be able to discard your admonition. Maybe God should have taken a clue and tied us to the bed instead of setting us free. I guess in your mind at least that would have been more gracious.

 

[Deeje]

It did in the 19th century, when it removed two major props to belief:

First, that nature was so complex and occasionally so beautiful that the only explanation was a divine designer; and

Second, the complementary view that the biblical account of creation made more sense than any alternative.

But many branches of religion have digested the science and now regard evolution as a divine tool which God chose to effect the diversity of life.

(Were I a believer, I'd take the view that it was much less complicated, indeed much less silly, to think of evolution as always having done the divine will automatically, than to imagine God stepping in from time to time to tweak a gene here, a protein there &c.)

I see some important elements of truth in these statements.

People went from creation to evolution s l o w l y as the scientific community systematically destroyed God right before their eyes (or so it seemed). It was a bit like the frog in the pot scenario. But was everything they said based on real substantiated evidence or was most of is based on a small amount of real evidence, inflated to such a degree that it ended up far removed from the truth, without the general population even being aware of the ruse?

Science contends rather fiercely that it has to be correct, even though the majority of its "evidence" is not really substantive.....it has way more suggestion and assertion than it has facts. Yet suggest an Intelligent Designer and you might as well have taken out a weapon and threatened them!

They see the battle a bit like this.....

....but those who believe in God see him with a much bigger weapon....more like this

....and maybe it scares the atheists to think that if they are wrong, what can happen if God shows up one day like he promised to? According to the Bible, they have so much more to lose than we do. But each one will be where their hearts impel them to be.