Theistic Evolution?

[popsthebuilder]

Science itself is considered to be atheistic in the sense that it does not allow God to be invoked.

Science is not atheistic.

 

[NewChapter]

So why then would you be asking questions if you don't actually have a desire to learn anything?

I was finished with my question which had been answered.

 

[NewChapter]

Well...maybe you should do a bit more research, because the comment about apes no longer evolving shows that maybe you apply your own interpretation to it.

I just doubt it but thanks for the suggestion.

 

[NewChapter]

Because it takes a lot more time than that. It took millions of years and thousands of generations, so it doesn't just pop into existence. Secondly, evolution doesn't always take the same path twice. Actually, it tends to constantly take new and different paths, like eyes have evolved some 60 times in the time of our planet, and currently there are some 20 different kinds still around. Or like the ability to fly, flies, mosquitos, birds, squirrels, and flying fish, all different evolutionary paths and genetic code.

Apes should show some kind of verbal language abilities now if they developed into us, shouldn't they?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Apes should show some kind of verbal language abilities now if they developed into us, shouldn't they?

Not necessarily .. why should you be concerned about how Almighty God has created us?

Clearly, there is a difference between apes and humans .. it is Almighty God that is responsible for this, and whether God made us from atoms, black holes, worms or apes makes little difference

The disbelievers claim that creatures have no soul, and that consciouness somehow 'evolved' .. take no notice of them .. they can't prove it, particularly as it doesn't make any sense whatsoever!

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Apes should show some kind of verbal language abilities now if they developed into us, shouldn't they?

But modern apes didn't develop into us. Humans and apes share a common ancestor.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Not necessarily .. why should you be concerned about how Almighty God has created us?

Clearly, there is a difference between apes and humans .. it is Almighty God that is responsible for this, and whether God made us from atoms, black holes, worms or apes makes little difference

The disbelievers claim that we have no soul and that intelligence 'evolved' .. take no notice of them .. they can't prove it, particlularly as it doesn't make any sense whatsoever!

Please stop trying to promote ignorance. There's no harm in at the very least trying to listen and understand another point of view - unless you have something to fear from it being correct.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Please stop trying to promote ignorance. There's no harm in at the very least trying to listen and understand another point of view - unless you have something to fear from it being correct.

Actually I modified my post:
"The disbelievers claim that creatures have no soul, and that consciouness somehow 'evolved' .. take no notice of them .. they can't prove it.."

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Actually I modified my post:
"The disbelievers claim that creatures have no soul, and that consciouness somehow 'evolved' .. take no notice of them .. they can't prove it.."

What does that actually change?

 

[viole]

Just curious as to your thoughts on this. Often, people believe in either/or. Either one believes in the theory of evolution or believes in creationism. But, is it acceptable for lack of a better word, for a Christian to believe that God is the impetus behind Darwin's theory of evolution? Or, is this why ''theistic evolution'' came about? (in order for there to be a bridge (of sorts) between both schools of thought)

Looking forward to your thoughts on the topic.

Nope. The theory of evolution by natural selection does not grant rational justification to the beliefs in a deity like the Christian God.

In my opinion, evolutionary Christianity is oxymoronic. And it is usually held by people who want to have their cake and it eat it too. They want to be scientifically hip, and Christians at the same time, neglecting thereby to do their homework and see what both worldviews really entail.

Either God had something in mind when He started it or not. If He had not, then it is not clear why in the Bible He said He wanted to create someone in His image.

If He had, then the theory would have a teleological, goal oriented character. But there is nothing obviously teleological in a theory that is based on the natural selection of fully randomly acquired traits.

Add to the mix the wasteful and amoral characters of the underlining mechanisms, mechanisms that entail the development of beings with a nervous system needing to evolve an arm race in order to better eat other beings, and their weaker babies, with another nervous system or else starve to death, and you will see the problem.

Not to speak of the fact that we are here not only because of biology. We are here because of a series of contingent factors that costed the extinction of > 90% of all species of earth. Asteroids, volcanos, weather changes over eons, earthquakes, continental drifts, etc. etc. Did God start that too? Did He really tuned the trajectory of asteroids so that we could evolve from a rat-like creeping mammal, able to leave its stinking hole after the demise of dinosaurs?

No, a God like the Christian God would have not gone through that. He would have created the pinnacle of His creation from scratch instead of making it look like a hairless chimp after eons of fights (and victims) whose outcome was uncertain.

That is the reason why I believe that the fundamentalistic view of Christianity (that rejects evolution) is intellectually more consistent. Despite being obviously wrong.

Ciao

- viole

 

[muhammad_isa]

Either God had something in mind when He started it or not. If He had not, then it is not clear why in the Bible He said He wanted to create someone in His image.

Of course there's a reason why the universe exists. That's a fundamental difference between belief and disbelief. The 'in His image' is referring to the soul .. God is spiritual..

No, a God like the Christian God would have not gone though that. He would have created the pinnacle of His creation from scratch instead of making it look like a hairless chimp after eons of fights and victims whose outcome was uncertain..

Almighty God creates what He wills .. it makes no sense to suggest that life is meaningless in the 'grand scheme of things' .. When you say 'create from scratch', it's all relative. He has made us male and female .. that in turn causes extended family.

God is repsonsible for life and death, and He is in charge of our souls. Our physical bodies are in effect, on loan to us

 

[viole]

Of course there's a reason why the universe exists. That's a fundamental difference between belief and disbelief. The 'in His image' is referring to the soul .. God is spiritual..

It is not so "of course". By the way, I was not attacking the "in His image" idea. i was just addressing the inherent incompatibility between evolution by natural selection and traditional theism.

Almighty God creates what He wills .. it makes no sense to suggest that life is meaningless in the 'grand scheme of things' .. When you say 'create from scratch', it's all relative. He has made us male and female .. that in turn causes extended family.

Chimps come also in the "male and female" variety. And that is why we are also male and female, if evolution is true. No God needed.

But I am curious. what logical grant do you have that makes you say that it makes no sense to suggest that life is meaningless in the 'grand scheme of things'?

God is repsonsible for life and death, and He is in charge of our souls. Our physical bodies are in effect, on loan to us

What do you mean with "responsible"? Does He need to report to someone else if He messes up?

And you believe there are such things as souls. Right?

Ciao

- vile

 

[SkepticThinker]

So do I .. but I'm not in competition with Almighty God. Knowledge is very important, but pride can often send us astray. Many people find it reasonable to think that "there is no need for a god", and challenge His guidance found in the major scriptures.

Almighty God guides whomsoever He wills, and sends astray whomsoever He wills.
Not by magic .. it's of our own doing .. thinking that mankind can solve everything without help, and with scientific knowledge we can 'beat God' is fooling ourselves..

Almighty God's wisdom cannot be beaten .. ALL civilisations rise and fall .. I'd rather see it coming than deny that simple fact!

I often find it kind of strange when people claim to know what the god they worship thinks and wants and feels or how "he" operates and treats people and whatnot, which usually comes right after I've been told that this same god "works in mysterious ways" or is beyond us or something along those lines. That's all fine and good if you believe that, but I don't see how anyone could possibly know any of it, given that nobody has been able to demonstrate that any god(s) exists at all.

I feel a lot more comfortable sticking with things that can be measured, tested or demonstrated in some way. This kind of thing is what I consider "knowledge."

 

[muhammad_isa]

Chimps come also in the "male and female" variety. And that is why we are also male and female, if evolution is true. No God needed.

No .. I know you believe that the universe (or time) 'is god' ie. it's infinite
but life isn't something that is purely physical .. creatures have personalities. You might think that mankind will be able to 'program the soul' (eg with AI) and hence create what you see, but I think you'll find it's beyond our realm.
In any case, why would you want to do that? Aren't you satisfied with what God has made? Would you prefer some kind of robot for a husband?

But I am curious. what logical grant do you have that makes you say that it makes no sense to suggest that life is meaningless in the 'grand scheme of things'?

You might like to explain that in other words .. sorry

What do you mean with "responsible"? Does He need to report to someone else if He messes up?

And you believe there are such things as souls. Right?

I'll ignore the 'reporting' question .. I assume that it's sarcasm..

I know there are souls. Medical science shows us that physical health and mental health are both important. You might suggest that the soul 'oozes from a piece of meat', but whether that is true or not, how do you know that it won't 'ooze out of your body' upon death?

 

[viole]

No .. I know you believe that the universe (or time) 'is god' ie. it's infinite

I do not believe that the Universe is God, I am an atheist. And I do not believe that infinite = God, I am an atheist mathematician.

but life isn't something that is purely physical .. creatures have personalities.

Personalities are very likely the product of physics.

You might think that mankind will be able to 'program the soul' (eg with AI) and hence create what you see, but I think you'll find it's beyond our realm.

I don't believe we will ever be able to program the soul. There are not such things as souls.

In any case, why would you want to do that? Aren't you satisfied with what God has made? Would you prefer some kind of robot for a husband?

Do I have any choice? And there is no God. Just blind mechanisms.

You might like to explain that in other words .. sorry

What leads you to the conclusion that there is a meaning in the great scheme of things?

I'll ignore the 'reporting' question .. I assume that it's sarcasm..

Not really. Responsibility comes with accountability.

I know there are souls. Medical science shows us that physical health and mental health are both important. You might suggest that the soul 'oozes from a piece of meat', but whether that is true or not, how do you know that it won't 'ooze out of your body' upon death?

Simple. 15 shots of physical things in the form of Vodka, and your metaphysical soul will go crazy.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Ultimatum]

i was just addressing the inherent incompatibility between evolution by natural selection and traditional theism.

And, thus, you have cornered yourself into incompatibility.
Mainstream Christianity cannot even understand the first two chapters and, as far as I can see, neither do you.

 

[viole]

And, thus, you have cornered yourself into incompatibility.
Mainstream Christianity cannot even understand the first two chapters and, as far as I can see, neither do you.

I don't see how. Since I am an atheist.

Ciao

- viole

 

[muhammad_isa]

..And I do not believe that infinite = God, I am an atheist mathematician.

Yes .. I have an inclination towards mathematics myself ..
I wasn't referring just to 'the infinite' .. I specifically mentioned time & space

I don't believe we will ever be able to program the soul. There are not such things as souls.

Interesting .. but it still applies .. will mankind be able to create a lifeform with personalities as we observe that most creatures seem to have .. they are individuals are they not?
The soul is "in God's image" .. but far from perfect.
I could give you a list of 99 attributes of God if you wished .. He is not limited to 99 names .. in fact He is not limited at all

Do I have any choice? And there is no God. Just blind mechanisms.

Yes .. you do .. and Almighty God is full of Mercy towards His creation..
However, the best choice is that which is good for your soul ( not forgetting that the body also has a right over you )
I find it difficult to envisage life in such a 'cold' way as thinking it to be 'blind mechanism' .. it is a big test .. not easy at all ! With knowledge comes responsibility. That word again..
In a perfect world with perfect people, we would expect it to be "just" and much like a community of ants or bees, be in harmony. This takes responsibilty. Sometimes, human beings don't want to take it (or maybe can't due to health problems)

What leads you to the conclusion that there is a meaning in the great scheme of things?

I might be depressed, but I'm not totally without hope..

 

[Ouroboros]

Apes should show some kind of verbal language abilities now if they developed into us, shouldn't they?

No. They shouldnt. That's not evidence for evolution. Evolution takes it own paths, not your paths.

Besides, they do have primitive language abilities. Dogs, cats, dolohins, birds, monkeys, and other animals all show abilities to signal information through sounds. It's not a fully developed grammatical language, but it's a primitive form of communication

 

[viole]

I might be depressed, but I'm not totally without hope..

Do you evaluate the truth value of statements based on what depresses you and whatnot?

Ciao

- viole