Why isn't evolution in the Bible?

[The Sum of Awe]

Because the Bible is not a science textbook.

Genesis is about our relationship with God, Creation, and each other.

But how does it exist side by side? If there was something proven that happened, even proven through science, in the beginning, shouldn't it have been written in the Bible, it does involve the Creation.

 

[lunamoth]

But how does it exist side by side? If there was something proven that happened, even proven through science, in the beginning, shouldn't it have been written in the Bible, it does involve the Creation.

I really can't believe you are serious about this.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Perhaps but a philosophy you live by and practice regularly would be a religion.

By that definition almost anything can be a religion.
Where do you suggest we draw the line between a religion and a philosophy by which to live?
And seeing as most people have some kind of philosophy they live by, wouldn't that, again according to your definition, make everyone religious and thus take away all meaning from the word?

Taking away the reason doesn't take away from the practice.

Can you elaborate on this please?
To me it seems that if you take away the reason for the practice you also take away the meaning of it.

To some heaven is a motivating factor but if that is their reason then it is a rather selfish motivation and most likely against teachings. Just like doing things just cause god said so is a false sense of morality and also likely against teachings. At least those things are against my understanding of christianity.

In my experience most people act in their own self interest most of the time.

 

[Quagmire]

But gods ARE by definition supernatural and so are the notions of an afterlife, be it in the form of a place in heaven or through reincarnation.
Look, if all these religions stuck to simply what we know about the physical universe, then that would be fine.

Then you'd let them exist you mean?

But they don't, and I doubt they would have much clout if they did.
A lot of people apparently like a good comforting fairytale.

And a lot of people find comfort in writing something off as a fairytale if they don't understand it.

Errr... no. People don't get to invent their personal meaning of words.

Ah. OK, I'll shoot off an email to the members of all those religions I mentioned and tell them that Jarofthoughts says they aren't allowed to call their religion a religion anymore. I'm sure they'll understand.

But all of this is still beside the point we're actually discussing, and it is also irrelevant.
What I have a beef with are the claims about the supernatural.
Not what people call themselves or not.

This thread isn't about what you have a beef with.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Then you'd let them exist you mean?

And now you are being ridiculous.

And a lot of people find comfort in writing something off as a fairytale if they don't understand it.

What's there to understand?
That people have, over the course of history, created stories in an attempt to make sense of a universe they knew little about and that some people found that they could exploit those stories to manipulate others into effective servitude?
Sounds pretty easy to understand to me.

Ah. OK, I'll shoot off an email to the members of all those religions I mentioned and tell them that Jarofthoughts says they aren't allowed to call their religion a religion anymore. I'm sure they'll understand.

Right.
Condescending nonsense again.
This is getting old.

This thread isn't about what you have a beef with.

No, but you seem to have a problem grasping what I'm trying to say, so I wanted to make that loud and clear.

 

[Quagmire]

And now you are being ridiculous.

Actually, I was showing you how ridiculous you were being.

What's there to understand?
That people have, over the course of history, created stories in an attempt to make sense of a universe they knew little about and that some people found that they could exploit those stories to manipulate others into effective servitude?
Sounds pretty easy to understand to me.

Not so much easy as simple.

Right.
Condescending nonsense again.
This is getting old.

How else should one respond to someone who thinks they have a right to decide what a multitude of other people can call themselves?

No, but you seem to have a problem grasping what I'm trying to say, so I wanted to make that loud and clear.

Oh no, I understand completely what it is your saying. I just don't think you do. You seem completely oblivious to the implications of your own words, even after they've been pointed out to you.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I really can't believe you are serious about this.

Why not?

 

[lunamoth]

Why not?

If you are serious then my only comment is :tuna: .

 

[downtown1441]

Evolution doesn't appear in the Bible because it' s a pretty advanced scientific concept, and several thousand years ago as the Bible was written down there was no reason for God to relate it to the people writing the book down.

That's how it words from a hard religious perspective.

But really this thread makes about as much sense as "why isn't nuclear fission in the Bible?" **** is complicated, and religious texts were related to humanity several thousand years ago.

Why isn't an Air Force in the Constitution?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

If you are serious then my only comment is :tuna: .

How about explaining in full detail.

 

[lunamoth]

How about explaining in full detail.

Explaining what in full detail? In what possible way could it make sense to ask why evolution was not described in the Bible?

Never mind. Carry on.

At least now this thread has a dancing hamster in it. : hamster :

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Explaining what in full detail? In what possible way could it make sense to ask why evolution was not described in the Bible?

Never mind. Carry on.

At least now this thread has a dancing hamster in it. : hamster :

DANCING HAMSTER!

 

[idav]

Evolution doesn't appear in the Bible because it' s a pretty advanced scientific concept, and several thousand years ago as the Bible was written down there was no reason for God to relate it to the people writing the book down.

True that if someone would have spread this knowledge to people they might have been called crazy as if them saying they were speaking from god didn't give it away.

 

[idav]

By that definition almost anything can be a religion.
Where do you suggest we draw the line between a religion and a philosophy by which to live?
And seeing as most people have some kind of philosophy they live by, wouldn't that, again according to your definition, make everyone religious and thus take away all meaning from the word?

No it wouldn't really take away from it. Religion is when a group of people use the same methods and adhere to the same philosophies and tenets.

Can you elaborate on this please?
To me it seems that if you take away the reason for the practice you also take away the meaning of it.

If the religion is worth anything then all the miracles shouldn't make a difference. I'm sure plenty would be devastated to find out god doesn't exist but it doesn't have to be like that. God should never be a crutch.

In my experience most people act in their own self interest most of the time.

Yeah thats sad.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Actually, I was showing you how ridiculous you were being.

Not so much easy as simple.

More condescending nonsense.

How else should one respond to someone who thinks they have a right to decide what a multitude of other people can call themselves?

Never said I did.
Words have meaning and you don't get to change that just because it's convenient at the time.
Would you expect me to take you seriously if you claimed to be a donkey?

Oh no, I understand completely what it is your saying. I just don't think you do. You seem completely oblivious to the implications of your own words, even after they've been pointed out to you.

Again with the condescending nonsense.
Let me know when you have refuted my claim with a new scientific breakthrough based on scripture.

 

[jarofthoughts]

No it wouldn't really take away from it. Religion is when a group of people use the same methods and adhere to the same philosophies and tenets.

Sorry, but I'm not buying it.
By that definition every political movement and every profession is a religion.

If the religion is worth anything then all the miracles shouldn't make a difference. I'm sure plenty would be devastated to find out god doesn't exist but it doesn't have to be like that. God should never be a crutch.

So why believe in such a thing in the first place?

 

[idav]

Sorry, but I'm not buying it.
By that definition every political movement and every profession is a religion.

The motiives should be different but oddly are not always. What do you think the purpose of religion is? Why do you think people need it? There is a reason why it won't go away even when we get rid of superstition. You've already been given a list of religions that don't depend on supernatural. They aren't really religions even if they meet once a week? More like cults?

So why believe in such a thing in the first place?

Cause it is but one tool. A crutch is a tool but you should eventually be able to walk without one.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

If the Bible's story Genesis was about how God created mankind, why isn't Evolution in the Bible?

Because it wasn't discovered yet.

 

[Quagmire]

More condescending nonsense.

No probs, man. I was just trying to help you by showing you what your posts looked like from someone else's perspective. If you don't want to know, that's your right and your problem.

Never said I did.

Yeah you did.

Words have meaning and you don't get to change that just because it's convenient at the time.

Cool. I'll include that in the email I was talking about.

Would you expect me to take you seriously if you claimed to be a donkey?

No, but I would take you seriously if you said you were.

Again with the condescending nonsense.

Like I said: just tying to give you a little insight. If you don't want it, no skin off my nose.

Let me know when you have refuted my claim with a new scientific breakthrough based on scripture.

That wasn't your claim, this was:

You might as well ask why they don't mention Relativity, Quantum Physics or Neurology.
Religious texts unsurprisingly reflect the level of scientific understanding that was available to people living at that time, no matter what some people will try to convince you of.
There is not a single example of a religious text providing scientific insight before science itself arrives at that conclusion and all claims that they do are always after the fact and based on loose allegories that can mean anything at all.

(keep on moving those goal posts. I'll just keep moving them back. )

and I will. Mind if I use this quote in the OP?

 

[Yanni]

If the Bible's story Genesis was about how God created mankind, why isn't Evolution in the Bible?

Whether or not evolution was part of the process in Creation, the Bible (Torah) makes one thing absolutely clear: man did not evolve. Perhaps evolution played a role with other organisms. But the Torah explicitly states that God created man from the dust of the earth, and not from a preexisting specie.