Is the Theory of Evolution Harmless to Religion?

[Quiddity]

Well He owns the playground, so He makes the rules. If I am the supreme law maker, can I be held to have broken any laws? If so, I can simply change them to fit with what I choose to do. Omnipotence is a good fall back for your argument.

I honestly don't understand this.

~Victor

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Victor,

I will attempt to explain. I meant by my post that by definition there is not going to be anyone to hold God accountable for any wrongdoings for the following reasons:

If we presuppose that God is all knowing, all powerful and all good, then

1) Anything done by God, would definitionally be good and proper.
2) Anything done by God which we perceive to be evil, is obviously an errancy on our part.
3) If God is what He claims to be, then there is no higher power to which he has to answer.

Basically by referring to Him making the rules, I meant it to mean that God decides what is good or evil. Therefore, whatever He does, that he decides to call good, is good. Even if he, say, murders all inhabitants of the world, except for one family. If Stalin or Hitler did this, pretty much anyone reading this would say this activity would be bad, or evil. God can do the same thing, and according to Genesis, he did, and that same activity is a good or proper act.

This same act, which done by anyone else would be seen as evil, is good, simply because God says it is good. As it is his playground and his ball, he makes the rules as he sees fit, and therefore anything he says goes.

I hope that helps to explain my point. If not, let me know and I will take another stab at it.

B.

 

[RagnarGalt]

I caught this thread late but figured I would atleast add my 2 cents on the original question... Evolution is not harmless to religion... It teaches against a very important principle in the Bible... As was quoted early in the thread, Genesis specifically states that God created all of the animals according to their kind... They were all created as individual species without a need for an evolving from one kind to another... Later on in the Bible, we are taught that 'God cannot lie'... To try to make evolution fit the creation account is to affront God by labelling him a liar which he is not... Later on in the thread, many use the phrase 'creationists are threatened by evolution'... It appears as a taunt to creationists to allow for evolution so as to prove we are not threatened by it... I am not personally threatened by it... It is simply another one of those God-dishonoring fallacies out there that will ultimately be disproven... In the meantime, I discuss it with people not out of a fear of it being proven true, but to free people from the notion that they are somehow less intelligent for believing the creation account over the evolution fantasy... To this day Evolution is still called a theory, and it will continue to be called as such until it is replaced by a true account of what happened at the beginning of man...

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

I caught this thread late but figured I would atleast add my 2 cents on the original question... Evolution is not harmless to religion... It teaches against a very important principle in the Bible... As was quoted early in the thread, Genesis specifically states that God created all of the animals according to their kind... They were all created as individual species without a need for an evolving from one kind to another... Later on in the Bible, we are taught that 'God cannot lie'... To try to make evolution fit the creation account is to affront God by labelling him a liar which he is not... Later on in the thread, many use the phrase 'creationists are threatened by evolution'... It appears as a taunt to creationists to allow for evolution so as to prove we are not threatened by it... I am not personally threatened by it... It is simply another one of those God-dishonoring fallacies out there that will ultimately be disproven... In the meantime, I discuss it with people not out of a fear of it being proven true, but to free people from the notion that they are somehow less intelligent for believing the creation account over the evolution fantasy... To this day Evolution is still called a theory, and it will continue to be called as such until it is replaced by a true account of what happened at the beginning of man...

Gravity is also still called a theory. Want to debate whether my coffee cup will hit the ground if I drop it?

B.

 

[RagnarGalt]

I won't debate the RESULTS that the cup will hit the ground, but if you want to tell me that the 'theory' of gravity fully explains the CAUSE that creates that effect, then I would expect you to prove it to me as FACT against the other theories out there that deal with physical forces... I don't consider evolution fact either, but when it is delivered as fact in schools, and those who are believers in creation are treated as unintelligent, I expect someone to treat it with the old scientific method and show me all the vaults of evidence someone must be hiding somewhere to prove it...

 

[Quiddity]

Victor,

I will attempt to explain. I meant by my post that by definition there is not going to be anyone to hold God accountable for any wrongdoings for the following reasons:

If we presuppose that God is all knowing, all powerful and all good, then

1) Anything done by God, would definitionally be good and proper.
2) Anything done by God which we perceive to be evil, is obviously an errancy on our part.
3) If God is what He claims to be, then there is no higher power to which he has to answer.

So far so good. I understand so far....

Basically by referring to Him making the rules, I meant it to mean that God decides what is good or evil. Therefore, whatever He does, that he decides to call good, is good.

Ditto...

Even if he, say, murders all inhabitants of the world, except for one family.

Correct. So what's the problem?

If Stalin or Hitler did this,pretty much anyone reading this would say this activity would be bad, or evil. God can do the same thing, and according to Genesis, he did, and that same activity is a good or proper act.

Stalin and Hitler aren't God and are far from righteous.

This same act, which done by anyone else would be seen as evil,

That's because anyone else IS a sinner/evil.

is good, simply because God says it is good.

Your catching on. Your only task is to come to understand WHY? Not fight him and object as if you knew any better.

As it is his playground and his ball, he makes the rules as he sees fit, and therefore anything he says goes.

It is grounded in God [size=-1]Himself. God is good so we are His creatures, made in His image, so we are[/size] [size=-1]good insofar as we are like Him, and united with Him in purpose and[/size] [size=-1]outlook. It's as simple as that, but one can write volumes about it, as well.[/size]

I hope that helps to explain my point. If not, let me know and I will take another stab at it.

I understand and thank your for your time to explain. It is appreciated.

~Victor

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Well Victor,

I am glad I made myself understood to you. I personally do not accept that an evil act is not evil simply because of who did it, but this is simply one of the things upon which we will have to agree to disagree. As always, it has been a pleasure discussing with you.

B.

 

[RagnarGalt]

I notice that you say that destroying a world of ungodly mankind was 'murder' and an evil act... On what do you base this? Man had grown violent and the inclination of his thought were only bad all the time... Later at Sodom and Gomorrah, God saved again only those deserving... How again can this be considered murder or evil?

 

[Fade]

Well, shucks michel, let me think real hard ... wait ... I got it ... two possible answers to the question were ...

1. Yes.
2. No.

What do you think?

LOL, Deut reminds me of the Dr. Cox character from the show scrubs. And in case you are wondering he's my favourite character so this is a compliment of sorts

 

[Quiddity]

Well Victor,

I am glad I made myself understood to you. I personally do not accept that an evil act is not evil simply because of who did it, but this is simply one of the things upon which we will have to agree to disagree. As always, it has been a pleasure discussing with you.

B.

No problem. Perhaps another day and another topic we can get into the details as to why I don't see Him doing anything evil. Which is of course the center of our disagreement.

~Victor

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

No problem. Perhaps another day and another topic we can get into the details as to why I don't see Him doing anything evil. Which is of course the center of our disagreement.

~Victor

Start the thread and I will be happy to debate the subject with you. I don't think either of us figure we will change the other one's mind, but it is healthy and enjoyable to debate.

B.

 

[Smoke]

I won't debate the RESULTS that the cup will hit the ground, but if you want to tell me that the 'theory' of gravity fully explains the CAUSE that creates that effect, then I would expect you to prove it to me as FACT against the other theories out there that deal with physical forces... I don't consider evolution fact either, but when it is delivered as fact in schools, and those who are believers in creation are treated as unintelligent, I expect someone to treat it with the old scientific method and show me all the vaults of evidence someone must be hiding somewhere to prove it...

We don't know everything about evolution, but that does not invalidate the fact of evolution. Evolution is an undeniable fact, and there is really no doubt about it at all. Those who pretend otherwise are deceiving themselves.

 

[Anonymous Atheist]

Nicely said.

 

[Scuba Pete]

We don't know everything about evolution, but that does not invalidate the fact of evolution. Evolution is an undeniable fact, and there is really no doubt about it at all. Those who pretend otherwise are deceiving themselves.

True dat. But the question before us was whether or not Evolution is harmful to religion. So far, mostly atheists have argued that it is, and I have consequently questioned their ulterior motives. For many (if not most) of us Christians, the Scriptures and evolution are complementary and have no conflict.

 

[Smoke]

True dat. But the question before us was whether or not Evolution is harmful to religion. So far, mostly atheists have argued that it is, and I have consequently questioned their ulterior motives. For many (if not most) of us Christians, the Scriptures and evolution are complementary and have no conflict.

I was responding to a post that asserted that evolution is not a fact.

It may be that it's mostly or only atheists who assert that evolution is harmful to religion in general, but there are a great many believers -- mostly Christians -- who assert that evolution is contrary to their religion, and would invalidate their religion if it were true.

 

[Scuba Pete]

I was responding to a post that asserted that evolution is not a fact.

It may be that it's mostly or only atheists who assert that evolution is harmful to religion in general, but there are a great many believers -- mostly Christians -- who assert that evolution is contrary to their religion, and would invalidate their religion if it were true.

No doubt that there are PLENTY of Christians who feel this way. However, these are way more vocal than the majority of Christians who know that evolution is true.

 

[michel]

Nicely said.

Hi Anonymous Atheist,


As I notice that this is your first time on here, I thought I would take the opportunity to Welcome you to Religious Forums;



I hope that you would feel able to introduce yourself to the other members of the forum, by posting on:- Are you new to ReligiousForums.com?



Please feel free to ask questions, if you have any. You might like to check out our article with links for our newer members; from there, there is also a link to the forum rules which you ought to look at.

I hope you will grow to enjoy this forum, and look forward to seeing your posts.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=21



Michel

 

[Smoke]

No doubt that there are PLENTY of Christians who feel this way. However, these are way more vocal than the majority of Christians who know that evolution is true.

I believe that in Europe the majority of Christians don't have any problem with evolution. However, in the U.S. that's probably not the case. A CBS poll conducted in November 2004 found that 60% of Evangelical Christians and 50% of all people who attended worship services every week believed Creationism should be taught in the public schools instead of evolution. Another CBS poll conducted in October 2005 found that 77% of white Evangelicals (and 74% of churchgoers generally) believe that God created humans in their present form, and that more than half of white Evangelical Christians believe it's impossible to believe in God and evolution.

That really doesn't bode well for the U.S. or for American Christianity.

 

[Yerda]

So far, mostly atheists have argued that it is, and I have consequently questioned their ulterior motives.

If your religion explicitly describes the special creation of species in an absurd chronological order within a seven-day period, and you believe this to be literal truth, I would have thought you've got a problem when faced with the findings of evolutionary biology.

Similarly ancient myths of giants flinging rocks about to explain mountain formation compete with the explanations of science. If you believe one I would imagine the other looks false.

What are these ulterior motives?

For many (if not most) of us Christians, the Scriptures and evolution are complementary and have no conflict.

In what ways would you say they complement each other Doc?

 

[Fade]

Personally I don't think that the theory of evolution is harmless to Religion (particularly fundamentalist aspects). ToE and science in general aren't specifically out to get religion but they are certainly a big part of why I perceive religiosity(is that a word?) as something that is no longer relevant to me or society in general. I don't give a rats as* about religion(....okay I do) but I know that if I was religious and I was presented with something that questioned my faith and the reasons for my faith, then I probably would be defensive.