If you believe in God AND evolution, why do you believe in God?

[Brian2]

Some do. Many in fact. What I believe is much like that, but I just conclude that we do not really know the Bible or the correct interpretation in a way that many think they do know.

I would think that they believe God was involved, but don't know when, where or how and have no evidence to say. So best stick with what we do have evidence for and the fact that it doesn't refute God, merely many interpretations that stand on the literal.

It is true that they do not know when, where and how and have no evidence to say, but it is not evolution which is denied, it is that the mechanism has to always be naturalistic and assumed to be naturalistic because of the naturalistic methodology.
There are many Bible interpretations that, of necessity, have to be wrong if only one is true, and it is good to keep that in mind. I think it is good to keep in mind also that not all the conclusions of science are correct and this is shown by scientific changes over time. So holding our Bible interpretations tentatively at times and also holding tentatively our scientific views of what happened in the past are both good things.

I'm not sure I follow. What heritable, adaptive changes are you saying are not explained by the theory of evolution?

Maybe all the changes are explained but the mechanism for the changes might not be correct.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It is true that they do not know when, where and how and have no evidence to say, but it is not evolution which is denied, it is that the mechanism has to always be naturalistic and assumed to be naturalistic because of the naturalistic methodology.

It isn't assumed to be naturalistic. That is a conclusion based on the evidence and lack of any evidence that indicates otherwise. Science cannot be used to claim things without evidence.

I'm assuming you mean when where and how things evolved? Are are you referring to the origin of life which is a different field of study.

There are many Bible interpretations that, of necessity, have to be wrong if only one is true, and it is good to keep that in mind.

If there is only one that is true, then sure. I'm not sure it matters so much. It is the belief that is important.

I think it is good to keep in mind also that not all the conclusions of science are correct and this is shown by scientific changes over time.

Science refines with each new piece of evidence or new line of understanding. Some try to play that as a weakness, but it is a strength. The success of science is testament to that.

So holding our Bible interpretations tentatively at times and also holding tentatively our scientific views of what happened in the past are both good things.

I would need to better understand what you mean by holding biblical interpretations as tentative.

Maybe all the changes are explained but the mechanism for the changes might not be correct.

Again, I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Do you mean the exact set of circumstances that occurred across time to go from an ancestor to derived descendant groups? It would be nice to have, but practical impossible to find. Such resolution is not necessary to support the general explanation of evidence. Additionally, for some lines of evolution, we do have greater resolution and that is improving one piece of evidence at a time.

 

[Trailblazer]

Is it still the 7th day?
Would that mean we're to still be at rest?

I don't know. I think you need to ask @YoursTrue

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That is not the point of the question posed at the beginning. It's not asking why a person believes in evolution if he also believes in God. So allow me to reiterate -- the point is if a person believes in evolution and God, why does such a person believe in God? It's not asking some to delineate why a person believes in evolution ... but rather why a person who believes in God and evolution believes in God. So far it seems for some no reason for belief in God is necessary...therefore none is given.

But why does it matter if a person believes in evolution or not?
Wouldn't you expect the same kind of answers to the question "why do you believe in god", regardless of whether the questioned also believe in evolution or not?

Your question singles out evolution and gives it special status. Your question's existence implies that the answer of "why believe in god" is influenced by belief in evolution. Why else would you frame the question like that?

I don't see you asking "why believe in god if you believe in gravity?" or even "why believe in god if you believe in homeopathy?"

The very question asserts a connection between belief in god and whatever extra belief you attach to it.
What is this connection, or what do you expect this connection to be?


It's a fair question.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I firmly believe that each day is considered a period of time within which what is said to have taken place took place. It could have been thousands of years for each day, we don't know

We do know the age of the earth though. It's roughly 4.5 billion years.
The sun is 4.6 billion years
The universe is 13.7 billion years.
So I think "a few thousand years" per day ain't gonna cut it.

, but what we DO know is extraordinary in that the 7th day is said to have begun but there is no close to it recorded. Every other day of creation has a beginning and an end -- not the 7th day.

Maybe god is still resting.

Silly jokes aside, what do you find so extraordinary about that?

 

[YoursTrue]

I don't think that is the same thing. First of all, acceptance of a theory isn't the same as holding a spiritual belief based on faith. A theory is an explanation based on reasoning and evidence. It is contingent. But in this particular case we are talking about a theory with a body of evidence so large and robust, it would require a very significant and extraordinary body of evidence to overturn it.

Secondly, the theory is foundational to modern biology and ties it all together. You could ignore it, but a lot of what we have learned wouldn't make much sense following that paradigm.

Even if the theory of evolution was rejected, the change that is represented in the evidence still exists. Without the theory to explain it, it would still demand an explanation in the context of science.

Finally, it has been formulated and supported using the same methodology as any other theory, any other science, so rejecting it would demand a significant reason that takes that into account and explains the selectivity. Picking and choosing acceptance of science based on some external ideology would require that ideology possess that extraordinary and significant evidence and explain how the theory is different from any other theory so that it could be surgically overturned.

Once again -- and yes, this is not the thread to discuss the topic of evolution but I"m pushed to say something now -- there is nothing beyond conjecture to support the idea that humans evolved from fish as time went on. And which fish? or fishes, of course. Nothing, nothing, nothing but conjecture going from fish to landrovers to apes.

But you keep referencing the past position taken by those that support the theory of evolution in former discussions and debates. I have been explaining why your complaint about that is unjustified by your reference about what has been done. Those discussions were discussions of science and no one would expect anyone to start speaking of their personal beliefs. Recall that context is important.

And again, I repeat, why does it matter unless you are claiming that the one cannot exist with the other and that those so identified are not "true" believers. Is that what you are attempting? Keeping in mind that I'm aware of your religious affiliation and the basis of a somewhat or pseudo-literal interpretation of the Bible and the rejection of anything that is contrary to that interpretation. I respect your right to believe as you choose, but I don't agree with the position or find any reason to consider it the only way to believe.

I get that, but I remind you that you continually make mention of what has been done elsewhere in this forum. My responses and the responses of others simply address those references and explain them.


And what do you think will come of this knowledge? What questions do you consider it will answer? What do you think this says about their belief that is important enough to mine the information so vigorously and doggedly?

That is not what I have been reading. I have read faith mentioned several times. Why do you believe in God? Not adherence to a particular religion or denominational ideology within a religion, but God specifically. Perhaps your answer will save you the trouble of looking further.

So if a person believes on faith that God exists, those who do not believe God exists do not have the faith to believe that God does exist.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Once again -- and yes, this is not the thread to discuss the topic of evolution but I"m pushed to say something now -- there is nothing beyond conjecture to support the idea that humans evolved from fish as time went on. And which fish? or fishes, of course. Nothing, nothing, nothing but conjecture going from fish to landrovers to apes.

DNA matches are not a matter of conjecture.
And DNA matches = common ancestors.

 

[YoursTrue]

@Spice -- In answer to your question, it means that the seventh day of creation has not come to an end. To understand this better requires some time and study and prayer. I will start, however, by explaining a few things about this. There's more, but you can look it up if you want to at www.wol.org.
God prepared the earth for human habitation during the six figurative days. Each of these days is marked by the words that there came to be evening and morning. But with respect to the seventh day, the Bible does not say it has a closure. God told Adam and Eve to fill the earth and subdue it. But that was before he was expelled from the Garden due to his disobedience. So there are new heavens and a new earth that true Christians are awaiting in which righteousness will be. (Revelation 21:1-5) It's a very interesting study, so if you'd like, there's more detailed information at www.wol.org. Hope this helps to answer.

 

[Colt]

Be brave--and support your belief in God with reason, if possible, please. That is if you believe in evolution as well as in God.

I believe that Life was created via the technique of evolution. Within evolution is the "purposive potential" of Gods plan.

My beliefs are based on the Urantia Book revelation of 1955. IMOP

Life Establishment on Urantia

 

[YoursTrue]

But you keep referencing the past position taken by those that support the theory of evolution in former discussions and debates. I have been explaining why your complaint about that is unjustified by your reference about what has been done. Those discussions were discussions of science and no one would expect anyone to start speaking of their personal beliefs. Recall that context is important.

And again, I repeat, why does it matter unless you are claiming that the one cannot exist with the other and that those so identified are not "true" believers. Is that what you are attempting? Keeping in mind that I'm aware of your religious affiliation and the basis of a somewhat or pseudo-literal interpretation of the Bible and the rejection of anything that is contrary to that interpretation. I respect your right to believe as you choose, but I don't agree with the position or find any reason to consider it the only way to believe.
with t
I get that, but I remind you that you continually make mention of what has been done elsewhere in this forum. My responses and the responses of others simply address those references and explain them.


And what do you think will come of this knowledge? What questions do you consider it will answer? What do you think this says about their belief that is important enough to mine the information so vigorously and doggedly?

That is not what I have been reading. I have read faith mentioned several times. Why do you believe in God? Not adherence to a particular religion or denominational ideology within a religion, but God specifically. Perhaps your answer will save you the trouble of looking further.

I believe in God because I believe He taught me about Him. I hope that helps. To augment that, I had not believed in God for many years but I needed help with my life. I read books about God, Buddhism and more, spoke to a Catholic priest, also a Protestant cleric, as you probably know I sang in church as a paid choir member, I still did not believe. So why do I believe now? I will tell you. I learned from a minister that faith is a gift from God in order to believe in Him. And I argued slightly with him, but I finally asked in prayer the one I did not know (who is invisible) and which I wasn't sure was there that if he was there could He give me this gift of faith. And He did. I argued vociferously at first with the ones who taught me more about the Bible and God, but because of their belief in Jesus Christ and the way they followed Jesus, I realize that God heard my prayer. Thank you, and take care. (There's more but I'll leave it at that for now.)

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Once again -- and yes, this is not the thread to discuss the topic of evolution but I"m pushed to say something now

You are the one that first mentioned it and you made it part of the topic in doing so. But the discussion about it has been around why it is significant in relation to the other topic of discussion. So far, nothing has been mentioned to connect the two.

-- there is nothing beyond conjecture to support the idea that humans evolved from fish as time went on. And which fish? or fishes, of course. Nothing, nothing, nothing but conjecture going from fish to landrovers to apes.

I won't argue with you on this, but it isn't conjecture. You can claim it is if makes you feel better, it isn't.

So if a person believes on faith that God exists, those who do not believe God exists do not have the faith to believe that God does exist.

I have no idea what you are saying. I'm more interested in why you included the theory of evolution as some sort of caveat of belief in God.

 

[YoursTrue]

It isn't assumed to be naturalistic. That is a conclusion based on the evidence and lack of any evidence that indicates otherwise. Science cannot be used to claim things without evidence.

I'm assuming you mean when where and how things evolved? Are are you referring to the origin of life which is a different field of study.

If there is only one that is true, then sure. I'm not sure it matters so much. It is the belief that is important.

Science refines with each new piece of evidence or new line of understanding. Some try to play that as a weakness, but it is a strength. The success of science is testament to that.

I would need to better understand what you mean by holding biblical interpretations as tentative.

Again, I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Do you mean the exact set of circumstances that occurred across time to go from an ancestor to derived descendant groups? It would be nice to have, but practical impossible to find. Such resolution is not necessary to support the general explanation of evidence. Additionally, for some lines of evolution, we do have greater resolution and that is improving one piece of evidence at a time.

I'd like to reply to this in another thread,

You are the one that first mentioned it and you made it part of the topic in doing so. But the discussion about it has been around why it is significant in relation to the other topic of discussion. So far, nothing has been mentioned to connect the two.

I won't argue with you on this, but it isn't conjecture. You can claim it is if makes you feel better, it isn't.

I have no idea what you are saying. I'm more interested in why you included the theory of evolution as some sort of caveat of belief in God.

As you well know, there are different religions. With differing beliefs. Either God is one way or the other. And for now I will leave it at that.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I believe in God because I believe He taught me about Him. I hope that helps. To augment that, I had not believed in God for many years but I needed help with my life. I read books about God, Buddhism and more, spoke to a Catholic priest, also a Protestant cleric, as you probably know I sang in church as a paid choir member, I still did not believe. So why do I believe now? I will tell you. I learned from a minister that faith is a gift from God in order to believe in Him. And I argued slightly with him, but I finally asked in prayer the one I did not know (who is invisible) and which I wasn't sure was there that if he was there could He give me this gift of faith. And He did. I argued vociferously at first with the ones who taught me more about the Bible and God, but because of their belief in Jesus Christ and the way they followed Jesus, I realize that God heard my prayer. Thank you, and take care. (There's more but I'll leave it at that for now.)

Do you think that you had to reject science or part of science to complete that realization? Did it come up frequently in your search for faith? I'm at a loss to understand where you would need to interject scientific theories into your witness statement here.

Can you say that prayer doesn't lead those that both believe and understand such things to the conclusions they come to?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I'd like to reply to this in another thread,

I'm here right now and I'm not interested in more threads where my questions remain unanswered.

As you well know, there are different religions. With differing beliefs. Either God is one way or the other. And for now I will leave it at that.

But the question is why you have included a scientific theory as a caveat of belief God. It should be simple enough to answer. You decided it was important to include the two things together. Why?

 

[metis]

But the ToE is very specifically about species and whether and how they may change over time.

Given what you have provided, my take on it would be that the scientific ToE does not conflict with, or is at least compatible with Buddhist philosophy. But in evaluating whether Buddhist philosophy speaks directly to biological evolution, I have yet to see any reference to a specific Buddhist theory of Speciation with accompanying explanitory mechanisms. As such, I would not include it in a history of evolutionary thought.

Buddhism predates the formation of the ToE, plus it is logically less explicit.

BTW, the first known reference towards the concept of the evolution of life comes from a Chinese philosopher many centuries ago, but I can't remember his name.

 

[metis]

I converted about twenty years ago now, though I would call myself a lapsed Catholic for fifteen of those years.

I hear ya.

I left the church for over 20 years when I converted to Judaism [Reform] but decided to rejoin the church about 5 years ago for mainly convenience's sake as my wife is a life-long Catholic even though she loved the synagogue. We alternated going to services week to week, but at my age it was getting too difficult to drive 30+ minutes to get there because of my eye problems.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Be brave--and support your belief in God with reason, if possible, please. That is if you believe in evolution as well as in God.

I believe in God because -like many others- I’ve experienced it. I believe in evolution too though. I do not see a contradiction there.

My definition of God is not, however, an old fellow in the clouds. I’d define it in words if I could, but I can’t because God is not definable in language and my metaphors and parables are too easily misunderstood.

I am at peace with this though.


Humbly,
Hermit

 

[Spice]

@Spice -- In answer to your question, it means that the seventh day of creation has not come to an end. To understand this better requires some time and study and prayer. I will start, however, by explaining a few things about this. There's more, but you can look it up if you want to at www.wol.org.
God prepared the earth for human habitation during the six figurative days. Each of these days is marked by the words that there came to be evening and morning. But with respect to the seventh day, the Bible does not say it has a closure. God told Adam and Eve to fill the earth and subdue it. But that was before he was expelled from the Garden due to his disobedience. So there are new heavens and a new earth that true Christians are awaiting in which righteousness will be. (Revelation 21:1-5) It's a very interesting study, so if you'd like, there's more detailed information at www.wol.org. Hope this helps to answer.

Yes, quite interesting is WOL. I didn't realize you had left JW. I admire your continuing journey. Stay curious and keep seeking. May God lead.
Namaste

 

[Trailblazer]

Your question singles out evolution and gives it special status. Your question's existence implies that the answer of "why believe in god" is influenced by belief in evolution. Why else would you frame the question like that? The very question asserts a connection between belief in god and whatever extra belief you attach to it.

What is this connection, or what do you expect this connection to be?

It's a fair question.

Yes, it is a fair question but a question I don't think you will get an answer to.
I think I know the answer but I won't speak for @YoursTrue

 

[Kathryn]

I hear ya.

I left the church for over 20 years when I converted to Judaism [Reform] but decided to rejoin the church about 5 years ago for mainly convenience's sake as my wife is a life-long Catholic even though she loved the synagogue. We alternated going to services week to week, but at my age it was getting too difficult to drive 30+ minutes to get there because of my eye problems.

I feel your pain. I really do.