What if it was created by God to evolve?

[PureX]

I believe that the laws of the universe including evolution were part of creation.

Not just "part of" creation, but are in fact the mechanisms of creation. (Or the ones we can recognize so far, anyway.)

As to us all being correct, there are those who take a literal interpretation of scripture and set their interpretation against evolution.

I still contend that this is a form of artifice idolatry. They are confusing the representational images with the ideals those images were meant to represent. A lot of people are sadly ignorant of the function and purpose of artifice in human culture.

 

[Brian2]

You did not address the point of the post,

What was the point of the post?

 

[shunyadragon]

(Yeah, leave it there...)
I read it and it leaves open so many questions, such as: THIS they think was the "Common Ancestor"? Beyond conjecture, what EVIDENCE (science-minded one likely forbid the word proof is used here...) is there? The chimpanzees, gorillas -- are any of these viewed as mutating to another whatever? (species -- group -- whatever you want to call them). Not enough time to observe? (What a joke it is...and truly a waste of human time and resources to try to figure it out "scientifically," that is...) That is what these discussions have helped me to conclude.

Without any knowledge of science based on an ancient religious agenda.

 

[Brian2]

You dont "trust god".
You trust your own capacity to determine / choose
what beliefs about which god are true.

As such you are hardly the one to recommend others
open their eyes.

Maybe but Jesus said.
John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.

So I have been chosen and have chosen also.
But you seem to be saying that nobody who believes anything should be listened to.
Does that mean we should only listen to those who believe nothing?

 

[Whateverist]

What if it was created by God to evolve? Does this mean we are all correct?

If by it, you mean everything .. the whole cosmic burrito perhaps the ‘it’ that is evolving is God? God as the One differentiates into the many through self generating processes. No watchmaker required.

 

[F1fan]

I find it remarkable that, while scientists declare there is a "Common Ancestor" among the "apes," of course in which they include the human race, they have not found that "common ancestor."

Once again you have an poorly informed opinion that could be corrected if you only learned science. Why do you keep posting your lack of knowledge in an open forum?

 

[ChristineM]

What if it was created by God to evolve? Does this mean we are all correct?

Theistic evolution is big in the Catholic world, i believe.

However, we know evolution occurs, the evidence is overwhelming. What no one knows is if a god did it. So we can't even give the idea of theistic evolution the status of hypothesis.

 

[sun rise]

I have been asking believers why God did it this way, and not some less painful way, and you guys are stumped.

If there is a God and if God is omnipotent and omniscient then to me a good analogy is a dog asking why he's being subject to feeling fear, pain and suffering (a vet visit). Before someone jumps on it, of course like all analogies it's imperfect, but the basic idea that non-human animals can't understand what it means to be human and why humans act in ways that they don't like is accurate.

A corollary is that suffering has a purpose. If someone is training to compete in the olympics they will put up with all sorts of pain and setbacks because the goal is motivating. When the competitor wins and stands on the platform to receive a metal, they will think that all the effort was worth it. And further if someone is put on the winner's platform as a gift the sense of joy at overcoming all the handicaps will be missing and the award meaningless. If there is a God and if the reward is bliss then such people will think that the effort is worth it.

 

[Alien826]

I see that you also make the error of seeing God as like a human with super powers, and have no belief in the whole story of what God is doing in making a bad situation into a good one in the end.

Of course we don't have to assume that God "like a human" in terms of being "good" in human terms, or even being aware of us to the point of caring what happens to us. Say it created the universe (or started it off) for some purpose of its own and humanity (all life really) was just an unimportant side effect? When we build a house we don't care how many ants we destroy in the process. But the ants might make up all kinds of reasons to explain what is happening to them.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Adaptation / evolution has played a role in many lifeforms we see. And the evidence supports this.

But was there a UCA (Universal Common Ancestor)? What does the fossil record show? It shows, especially in the Cambrian, many species appearing at once, with no obvious links to previous ones.

That’s why Stephen Jay Gould & others lamented the evidence that the fossil record presented.

Look it up. (Preferably from non-biased sites.)

Yes, forty or fifty years ago Gould noted that it would be nice to have more fossils. But your claim is not exactly accurate which is why you did not post any support for it at all.

But you know what has happened in the forty or fifty years? There has been an explosion of finds in paleontology. It used to be the norm for a new species every year, now it is new species every week.

Oops, Google search time. have to somewhat take back what I said. There are clearly more than one new species found every week. For dinosaurs alone there is a new species found every two weeks. And dinosaurs are a rather small part of the total of fossil finds each year:

How Many Dinosaurs Remain Undiscovered?

Paleontologists say more non-avian dinos are waiting to be uncovered than have previously been found

www.smithsonianmag.com

When one considers all of the fish and invertebrate fossils it is probably closer to a new species discovered every day.

Why do creationists think that progress is never made in the sciences?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Once again you have an poorly informed opinion that could be corrected if you only learned science. Why do you keep posting your lack of knowledge in an open forum?

There is a martyr complex that many Christians have, though what they go through is nowhere near being an actual martyr. I think that they say incredibly ignorant or even at times stupid things on purpose so that those that know better will "attack" them. They believe that makes them martyrs for Jesus somehow.

 

[Valjean]

The universe exists and needed a creator and designer.

Why? That doesn't follow. Explain this need.

Life exists and needed a life giver.

Why? That doesn't follow either.

Kalam cosmological argument - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You don't believe these things so why would you believe the description of God in the Bible. Plenty of people have experienced the supernatural and miracles from God.

But are their experiences consistent? Are they reproducible? Are they verifiable, or even measurable?Are they consistent with known, physical realities?

I can walk into a mental hospital and find half a dozen people claiming supernatural experiences and divine insight, but without inter-claim consistency or congruence with objective reality, would it be rational to believe them?

In re: descriptions of God in the Bible: The description is of a seriously disturbed monster.

Ignoring witness reports of the supernatural is an error. If it is rational to not ignore these and to conclude that they were real and to believe in the same God and trust Him, that is my faith and how it is rational.

What makes these many times removed, many times retold and recopied accounts reliable, especially when the claims are fantastical, word of mouth and many times recopied -- usually by scribes with an agenda.
Any forensic investigator will tell you that even first person accounts by eyewitnesses are notoriously inconsistent and often at odds with the actual facts.

After thousands of repetitions, cherry-picking of preferred narratives, and editing, these accounts are not reliable evidence for anything. Basing a belief system on such accounts is not rational, it is faith.

Of course but you have no faith in this God and the description of Him in the Bible and the long term good that is coming from all of God's decisions.

Unevidenced belief: "faith," is not rational, and a reasonable person would defer belief, pending actual evidence.
I also take exception to your claim of long term good. History and current events seem to contradict this.

You see this God, if anything, as just on the level of any human.

I don't see this God at all, but by His description, He's certainly not on a level with any ordinary human.
Perhaps a Genghis Kahn, Pol Pot or Ivan the Terrible....

 

[Valjean]

Christianity is no different to leprechauns, big foot, the lockness monster, aliens, invisible dragons in my garage, flying spaghetti monsters and anything else skeptics can dream up. But skeptics speak sh*t from the skeptic school of apologetics and faith in Jesus is beyond all that imo.

"Faith," per se, is not rational. Deferred belief, pending real evidence, is rational.

You make fantastical claims. The burden of proof is on you. Disbelief is the logical, epistemic default.

 

[Valjean]

I find it remarkable that, while scientists declare there is a "Common Ancestor" among the "apes," of course in which they include the human race, they have not found that "common ancestor."

So magic poofing is thus proven?

 

[Valjean]

That scientifically designated "common ancestor" among the apes (of which they include humans, of course) has not been found and therefore it's notated as the "UNKNOWN COMMON ANCESTOR." (UCA) Yet they 'know' that gorillas, chimpanzees, and others have "evolved" from this "UCA." Which they have not found as of yet.

And what alternative origin do you propose?

 

[ChristineM]

I find it remarkable that, while scientists declare there is a "Common Ancestor" among the "apes," of course in which they include the human race, they have not found that "common ancestor."

Dryopithecus is considered as the common ancestor of the great apes and man. These are believed to have lived during Miocene(about 16 million years ago). The fossils of Dryopithecus were discovered from many parts of Africa, Europe and Sivalik hills of India

https://www.toppr.com/ask/question/namethe-common-ancestor-of-the-great-apes-and-man/

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Adaptation / evolution has played a role in many lifeforms we see. And the evidence supports this.

The evidence indicates that it occurred through the entire history of living things and continues to.

But was there a UCA (Universal Common Ancestor)?

What about it? Do I have to know who your Great, Great, Great, Great, Great, Great, Great, Great, Great, Great, Great, Great, Great, Great Grandparents were to know there is every reason to consider that you had some? Where are they? Hmmm?

What does the fossil record show?

Change over time. The relationship of modern organisms to those of the past.

It shows, especially in the Cambrian, many species appearing at once,

Sigh! No, not at once? That is a misrepresentation of the evidence. What we see is an "explosion" that took place over 30 million years. You know this. You've seen this before. It is widely and easily available information. Please don't insult us by claiming otherwise.

with no obvious links to previous ones.

So. If we had all the answers we wouldn't need to look. We wouldn't need science. It was a period of rapid change. There have been others. Being ignorant of the details does not equate to wrong or some person's religious view becomes truth by default. Again, more things that have been aired in the past and here they are again.

That’s why Stephen Jay Gould & others lamented the evidence that the fossil record presented.

They did? Really? Lament you say. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Those poor guys. On the other hand my view of them is that they looked at the evidence and came up with an hypothesis regarding the mode of evolution. How it can sometimes occur with rapid change followed by stasis and then change again. Rapid in geological terms, not gotta get to work on time terms or gotta deny this now terms. So much for lamenting the fossil record and letting belief and denial run rampant to no productive end.

Look it up. (Preferably from non-biased sites.)

Thanks for the advice, but I don't look to JW sites, Answers in Genesis or ICR for science information anyway. Why would you?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The universe exists and needed a creator and designer.

While that is my belief, there is a little problem of evidence. There is none for a creator/designer and no indication one was needed.

Life exists and needed a life giver.

Again, I share that belief, but we run into the same problem as above.

Plenty of people have experienced the supernatural and miracles from God.

So they claim. Plenty of people claim to have seen Bigfoot, Nessie and aliens too. Is it only a matter that someone claim something and it is true?

I'm the King of the World. And ladies, I'm eligible.

You don't believe these things so why would you believe the description of God in the Bible.

Out of curiosity, what descriptions do you mean? Father? A burning bush? The God of creation?

Ignoring witness reports of the supernatural is an error.

Why? What is the basis for giving such claims the credibility to consider them?

If it is rational to not ignore these and to conclude that they were real and to believe in the same God and trust Him, that is my faith and how it is rational.

Believing in something without valid evidence can be considered irrational. I have to accept that. Why can't anyone?

Of course but you have no faith in this God and the description of Him in the Bible and the long term good that is coming from all of God's decisions.
You see this God, if anything, as just on the level of any human.

I'm not sure how that addresses the point of addressing contradiction in scripture or confronting edicts in the Bible like stoning to death of children by parents or support for institutions like slavery.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

What if the universe and everything it contains, along with our memories of having lived our entire lives, was created Last Thursday by the invisible extra-dimensional unicorn?

"what if" questions are useless unless you have at least a spec of evidence to justify the question.

Is that Sam the unicorn? I know his brother. They're good people. Saw them last Thursday in fact.

 

[John53]

(Yeah, leave it there...)
I read it and it leaves open so many questions, such as: THIS they think was the "Common Ancestor"? Beyond conjecture, what EVIDENCE (science-minded one likely forbid the word proof is used here...) is there? The chimpanzees, gorillas -- are any of these viewed as mutating to another whatever? (species -- group -- whatever you want to call them). Not enough time to observe? (What a joke it is...and truly a waste of human time and resources to try to figure it out "scientifically," that is...) That is what these discussions have helped me to conclude.

Would you prefer they lie and claim they have proof but you can only see it if you believe? Then they went knocking on your door at an inconvenient time and threatened you with missing out on paradise earth v 2.0 if you don't agree with them? Maybe they could stand on street corners harassing passers by? Would that be a better use of human time and resources?