Why would God create Evolution?

[Sonofason]

Why not just plant everything immediately?

Why should God plant everything immediately? Personally, I enjoy my work. I imagine God does too. I would not desire to wave a magic wand to complete all my work in an instant. Doing good work is satisfying.

Maldini continues

Why take 13 .82 billion years before putting Humans on Earth?

1. You don't know the age of the universe.
2. It is quite vain to think that God's existence revolves around human beings. Perhaps when God created the Universe, He didn't want human beings around.
3. God is not confined by the existence of a universe. God is eternal. God actually waited an eternity before putting us on this earth.

Maldini continues

You either accept Evolution or not. And If you do, saying stuff like God's the force behind Evolution, or God has created evolution is meaningless because when you can create stuff from scratch, why create Evolution? Why not just make the products? To mess with smart people who study science?

Actually, it is not one or the other. I personally do not accept evolution. Neither do I reject it. I have not seen any convincing evidence that evolution is true. On the other hand, I believe that the theory of evolution is quite reasonable. I accept evolution not as a proven fact, but as a reasonable theory. I believe God is reasonable. So why shouldn't God be reasonable?

And besides, creation without technique is hollow.

The most important thing for a great artist to have is passion. What sort of passion could be found in an artist who creates all of his works in an instant?

Also, it's fun to mess with people who think they're smart. I know I do.

 

[Skwim]

Why should God plant everything immediately? Personally, I enjoy my work. I imagine God does too. I would not desire to wave a magic wand to complete all my work in an instant. Doing good work is satisfying.

Maldini continues


1. You don't know the age of the universe.
2. It is quite vain to think that God's existence revolves around human beings. Perhaps when God created the Universe, He didn't want human beings around.
3. God is not confined by the existence of a universe. God is eternal. God actually waited an eternity before putting us on this earth.

Maldini continues


Actually, it is not one or the other. I personally do not accept evolution. Neither do I reject it. I have not seen any convincing evidence that evolution is true. On the other hand, I believe that the theory of evolution is quite reasonable. I accept evolution not as a proven fact, but as a reasonable theory. I believe God is reasonable. So why shouldn't God be reasonable?

And besides, creation without technique is hollow.

The most important thing for a great artist to have is passion. What sort of passion could be found in an artist who creates all of his works in an instant?

Also, it's fun to mess with people who think they're smart. I know I do.

And if I believe god is a glazed doughnut, why shouldn't he be a glazed doughnut? Sorry, but this one was just too good to pass up.

 

[EyeofOdin]

Why not just plant everything immediately? Why take 13 .82 billion years before putting Humans on Earth?

You either accept Evolution or not. And If you do, saying stuff like God's the force behind Evolution, or God has created evolution is meaningless because when you can create stuff from scratch, why create Evolution? Why not just make the products? To mess with smart people who study science?

It's better to say that "God's the force behind evolution" than to say that science is all wrong and the sky god's fat book is right because you say so.

In my opinion (btw I'm not a Christian) The Universe wasn't created for us. It was created for life. Once I accept the fact that I, along with my species, aren't the center of the universe, it all makes more sense and I'm not taking mental gymnastics to try and figure out the nature of everything.

How I think it all happened, divinities (which were born out of the combustion of creation) took the chaos from the self created "big bang" and made an orderly and habitable cosmos. Life then sprang forth and after a while man so happened to be one of the resulting species.

 

[paarsurrey]

I believe the thinking behind the question is, why bother with such a complex, time consuming, and wasteful process when with a wave of the god wand all species could be *poofed* into existance?

The same way G-d could finish life in a nanosecond.
But He has created life so that we could live longer, enjoy it and have his mercy. So life is evolved, it could be complex in our perception but simple for G-d.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

YOU cannot tell the difference between magic and reality?

Please first define "magic" and "reality" in your own words without copying/adapting/plagiarizing from any dictionary or any book.

Regards

 

[Estro Felino]

Why not just plant everything immediately? Why take 13 .82 billion years before putting Humans on Earth?

You either accept Evolution or not. And If you do, saying stuff like God's the force behind Evolution, or God has created evolution is meaningless because when you can create stuff from scratch, why create Evolution? Why not just make the products? To mess with smart people who study science?

I don't understand why it bothers you that Christians believe in Evolution.

 

[RichardParker]

I don't understand why it bothers you that Christians believe in Evolution.

Well... it is a bit odd, isn't it?
For a god like the christian one to use something like evolution to create humans if he wanted to create humans, don't you think?
If there was a god, like the biblical one, and he wanted to create humans, he probably would do it fairly instantanious. Not through a slow, gratual process, nor by making one of them, and then having to carve the other one out of a rip...

I don't know... just seems like the more reasonable approach to create the things you want.
But then again, I don't understand why god would want to create anything in the first place. He apparently already has everything and has no needs or desires, so why create anything in the first place?

I have to say, the ancient gods, like Zeus or Odin make more sense to me. They at least have human-like characters, not these omni-things that most people want to attribute to the modern gods. Therefore they also have desires and motivations, which could potentially lead to creative acts like creating life, planets or anything like that.

 

[Ouroboros]

Well... it is a bit odd, isn't it?
For a god like the christian one to use something like evolution to create humans if he wanted to create humans, don't you think?
If there was a god, like the biblical one, and he wanted to create humans, he probably would do it fairly instantanious. Not through a slow, gratual process, nor by making one of them, and then having to carve the other one out of a rip...

It's not strange.

Take the "evolved antenna". Engineers had a purpose, to create an antenna, but they used evolutionary algorithms to do it. They didn't know how it would come out, even though they knew what the end purpose was.

Evolved antenna - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Knowing what the end goals is and using a process that evolves it towards that goal are not in conflict with each other.

I don't know... just seems like the more reasonable approach to create the things you want.

Not if you want a surprise.

If you want something to be exactly the way you want it to be, yes, then you have to design every little detail, but if you have a bigger goal and you want the thing to be interesting, even to you, then you have to use a process that doesn't solve it your way, but in its own way.

Another example is games using algorithms to create worlds, landscapes, etc. There's been map generators for at least 10 years or more. The maps aren't made stick-by-stick, rock-by-rock by the map designer, but is randomized in a controlled manner to simulate natural formations.

But then again, I don't understand why god would want to create anything in the first place. He apparently already has everything and has no needs or desires, so why create anything in the first place?

Not that I believe in a personal God, but what is the omniscient, omnipotent God's weakest spot? It's that he's omniscient and omnipotent. So to create a world where he gives up perfect knowledge and perfect control, that would be the only thing he was missing.

 

[suncowiam]

I don't know... just seems like the more reasonable approach to create the things you want.
But then again, I don't understand why god would want to create anything in the first place. He apparently already has everything and has no needs or desires, so why create anything in the first place?

I'm in this boat. I'm open to a maker but not one thats been projected to be in the image of a human. I see that tend to be the case with religion. It is projection that our maker or God is human. And then why would God even care about creating us specifically? I just think it was probably a mistake or even unknown to the maker about our creation. We could be just like bacteria to him and as long as we're not hurting his own existence, why should he care beyond his survival?

 

[RichardParker]

It's not strange.

Take the "evolved antenna". Engineers had a purpose, to create an antenna, but they used evolutionary algorithms to do it. They didn't know how it would come out, even though they knew what the end purpose was.

Evolved antenna - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Knowing what the end goals is and using a process that evolves it towards that goal are not in conflict with each other.

Two problems with that:
First of all, you are saying that god knows the general goal of his creation, but he doesn't know how exactly it would look like in the end (that's the conclusion from your analogy)? So, your god doesn't know everything about the future of this world?

And the second problem: These engineers use the concept of evolution, all right... A concept that already exists.
But your god first had to create evolution. That's the problem. How evolution works as a concequence of the rules of this world is not really objectionable, and that a god COULD have used it is not a problem either.
But that he would start out creating such a concept in the first place seems rather odd.

Not if you want a surprise.

If you want something to be exactly the way you want it to be, yes, then you have to design every little detail, but if you have a bigger goal and you want the thing to be interesting, even to you, then you have to use a process that doesn't solve it your way, but in its own way.

Ok, so you DO believe in a god, that wants to have surprises?
All right. A bit odd, I don't think I know many theists who would put these attributes on their gods, but each theist has a different view of their god, so why the heck not.

But the reason, why evolution can result in surprising things to US is, because there are simply too many factors playing together, that will end up in an unpredictable result. NOT in a completly random or hypotheticly impossible to predict result, but rather in an unpredictable result to our limited minds.
So, your god has this kind of limited mind too? Despide the fact that he has created everything, he has lost track of how all the individual bits will interact?

I'm not saying that this is impossible, I'm just trying to grasp the god-concept you are proposing here.

 

[Ouroboros]

Two problems with that:
First of all, you are saying that god knows the general goal of his creation, but he doesn't know how exactly it would look like in the end (that's the conclusion from your analogy)? So, your god doesn't know everything about the future of this world?

The engineers wanted an antenna, but they didn't know what it would look like.

It's like knowing that you're going to build a box, but don't know how the box will look like yet.

And the second problem: These engineers use the concept of evolution, all right... A concept that already exists.
But your god first had to create evolution. That's the problem. How evolution works as a concequence of the rules of this world is not really objectionable, and that a god COULD have used it is not a problem either.
But that he would start out creating such a concept in the first place seems rather odd.

Unless that was the goal all along. To create an evolutionary world.

Ok, so you DO believe in a god, that wants to have surprises?

I don't believe in such a god, but I don't see a problem with a god who wanted it to be that way, just like the engineers.

All right. A bit odd, I don't think I know many theists who would put these attributes on their gods, but each theist has a different view of their god, so why the heck not.

Since I'm a naturalistic pantheist, I see God as the term to be used to describe all there is.

But the reason, why evolution can result in surprising things to US is, because there are simply too many factors playing together, that will end up in an unpredictable result. NOT in a completly random or hypotheticly impossible to predict result, but rather in an unpredictable result to our limited minds.
So, your god has this kind of limited mind too? Despide the fact that he has created everything, he has lost track of how all the individual bits will interact?

If God was omnipotent he would be able to create a world where he wouldn't be able to predict the path to how things would become alive. Perhaps he didn't except intelligent life to be bipedal?

I'm not saying that this is impossible, I'm just trying to grasp the god-concept you are proposing here.

A God who is omniscient and knows everything would be bored because he wouldn't ever have any surprises. That would be one major thing he would lack. He would have everything else but the unknown since he would know everything, so maybe (just playing with the idea here) he just wanted to use his omnipotence to overcome his omniscience?

 

[Estro Felino]

Well... it is a bit odd, isn't it?
For a god like the christian one to use something like evolution to create humans if he wanted to create humans, don't you think?
If there was a god, like the biblical one, and he wanted to create humans, he probably would do it fairly instantanious. Not through a slow, gratual process, nor by making one of them, and then having to carve the other one out of a rip...

I don't know... just seems like the more reasonable approach to create the things you want.
But then again, I don't understand why god would want to create anything in the first place. He apparently already has everything and has no needs or desires, so why create anything in the first place?

I have to say, the ancient gods, like Zeus or Odin make more sense to me. They at least have human-like characters, not these omni-things that most people want to attribute to the modern gods. Therefore they also have desires and motivations, which could potentially lead to creative acts like creating life, planets or anything like that.

It is odd if you think of God as a deity like Zeus or Odin.
God is the meaning or Logos which is in creation. The engine which leads creation to perfection. The goal of attaining perfection.

In 5 billions years the sun will die, and the Earth will be destroyed. That doesn't depend upon God's will

 

[Robert.Evans]

Why not just plant everything immediately? Why take 13 .82 billion years before putting Humans on Earth?

You either accept Evolution or not. And If you do, saying stuff like God's the force behind Evolution, or God has created evolution is meaningless because when you can create stuff from scratch, why create Evolution? Why not just make the products? To mess with smart people who study science?

It's an evolving consciousness. It takes longer here as it is different here... it has to be for us. The thing you talk about is the thing you think created it.

 

[RichardParker]

Since I'm a naturalistic pantheist, I see God as the term to be used to describe all there is.

I use a different term to describe that. I call that thing you've just described "reality". I think that describes "everything that exists" quite well, and doesn't have all the baggage the term "god" has, therefore it's less confusing. It describes the same thing as in your case the term "god" does, but people are less likely to confuse it with an all-powerfull, conscious being.

 

[Ouroboros]

I use a different term to describe that. I call that thing you've just described "reality".

That's one word.

We have many words to describe the same thing but from different perspectives.

We call it "The World", "The Universe", "Reality", "Everything" and more.

God is just another aspect of thinking of it. God, not necessarily as the sentient supernatural being that demands worship, but just as the thing, the It, that is the source of all that exists. It's not the cause, but the fabric of our very existence.

I think that describes "everything that exists" quite well, and doesn't have all the baggage the term "god" has, therefore it's less confusing.

Sure. But it's only confusing to you and others. I can use it in my daily use and thought for the purposes that I have. No one can tell me what I can do on my free time.

Anyway, my image of God does not fit the explanation I gave you earlier.

The explanation, or thought experiment earlier, was only to show that there very well can be explained and reason to why a personal God (which I don't believe in) could have reasons to create evolution. That's my point.

It describes the same thing as in your case the term "god" does, but people are less likely to confuse it with an all-powerfull, conscious being.

I have no problem with it, but I do know other people do.

But in our earlier discussion, we were not discussing my belief or view, we were contemplating a reasonable explanation to why a personal God (which I don't believe in) could have reasons to create evolution. Don't conflate thoughts about possibilities and a person's personal belief. They don't always equate.

For instance, you could discuss topics like Frodo in Lord of the Rings of why he did what he did without having to believe that Frodo was a real person. That's the power of human mind that we can reason and discuss even topics we don't necessarily believe to be true, for the interest of a wider understanding of things.

So here it is again, a God who was all-knowing would be bored by never being surprised, never have something happening that he didn't expect. Using his all-powerfulness, he might be abel to create a world that was unpredictable. Doesn't mean that I believe in that God, but I think it's a candidate for reason as good as any.

 

[idav]

God created evolution cause he wanted the process somewhat automated. Then you just sit back and watch your work do itself for you.

 

[RichardParker]

Sure. But it's only confusing to you and others. I can use it in my daily use and thought for the purposes that I have. No one can tell me what I can do on my free time.

Sure you can.
And I can call the color everybody else calls "blue"... I don't know, I want to call it "pointy".
And I want to call the things most people call "sky" "floor".

And then I can make statements like "The floor is pointy".
It's my free time! I can call it however I want.
...
And yet, it's not really something I would advice people to do. Because words have generally accepted meanings. And if you use words that have a generally accepted meaning (like the word that usually describes the all-powerfull creator of the universe --> "god"), and use it to describe something else, for which we have another word (like to describe "everything that is real"--> which we usually call "reality"), then the only thing you will accomplishe is confusion.

We have language to communicate. And this only works, if we have generally agreed definition... which usually isn't a problem.
Sometimes certain concepts can be described by different words, and sometimes we have different usages for certain words...
But if we are just replacing random words (like "reality") with words like "god", then we can stop using language all together, because we are just throwing around random words.

So, in that sense.

I would sing that princesse will not walk dictionaries in a tree that has rarely walked obnoxiously.

 

[PeaceSeeker]

Why not just plant everything immediately? Why take 13 .82 billion years before putting Humans on Earth?

You either accept Evolution or not. And If you do, saying stuff like God's the force behind Evolution, or God has created evolution is meaningless because when you can create stuff from scratch, why create Evolution? Why not just make the products? To mess with smart people who study science?

My spirit is shown the beginning, the beginning of man
But who is before man, how did God, this unity begin?
Come with me my son and you will see.

The beginning of God was many, many eons ago,
Travel with me to the start of time
To the beginning of the universe and where life began

That life form seems foreign, yet it is full of love
A rationality there from sprang then two, then more
The unity of spirit, God upon their demise began.

Now we will go back to your world, the start of man.
In the distance I see a speck, like a kernel of sand
Is that my land, my earth amongst the vast expanse?

God is Pure Intelligence that had a beginning possibly even long before the existence of our earth. People have mystified God, when the concept of God is really quite simple, even though God's intellect will always be beyond our comprehension. The universe evolved through time by intelligent guidance rather than interference.

 

[Ouroboros]

Sure you can.
And I can call the color everybody else calls "blue"... I don't know, I want to call it "pointy".
And I want to call the things most people call "sky" "floor".

And then I can make statements like "The floor is pointy".
It's my free time! I can call it however I want.
...
And yet, it's not really something I would advice people to do. Because words have generally accepted meanings. And if you use words that have a generally accepted meaning (like the word that usually describes the all-powerfull creator of the universe --> "god"), and use it to describe something else, for which we have another word (like to describe "everything that is real"--> which we usually call "reality"), then the only thing you will accomplishe is confusion.

We have language to communicate. And this only works, if we have generally agreed definition... which usually isn't a problem.
Sometimes certain concepts can be described by different words, and sometimes we have different usages for certain words...
But if we are just replacing random words (like "reality") with words like "god", then we can stop using language all together, because we are just throwing around random words.

So, in that sense.

I would sing that princesse will not walk dictionaries in a tree that has rarely walked obnoxiously.

But... I'm not talking about "my" God. You made the statement "Ok, so you DO believe in a god, that wants to have surprises?" in an earlier post.

The idea of a God who wants surprises is a hypothetical God and possible reasonable explanation to the purposes a Theistic God would have. A Theistic God that I don't believe in, but that doesn't mean I can't talk hypothetically about such a God.

I'm not throwing around any words here. We're still talking about the Theistic God (a personal God), which I don't personally believe in (regardless of your statement that you think I do). I don't believe in a personal Theistic God.

However, I do believe that it's reasonable that we can still continue to debate, discuss, reason, etc about a hypothetical God (which isn't my personal God) with reasonable arguments and claims.

So we can leave my beliefs apart and continue to discuss the hypothetical answer to why the Theistic/Personal God (Yahweh and the like) would have a reason to create the world and evolution.

My suggestion is, he was bored.

And the counter argument isn't "well, you're a pantheist and confuse the word God" since that's not the God-type we're actually debating.

And no, a Personal/Theistic God isn't the kind'a God I believe in. But I still can debate about it that kind'a God and different attributes.

You see, even if a person isn't a professional chef (no, that doesn't mean that I am one because I'm mentioning it) he/she can still have opinions and ideas about food.

The same way, I can have ideas about the hypothetical God (Theistic version, that I don't believe in) just the same as you do, even if neither one of us believe in the Theistic God.

 

[Apple Sugar]

Maybe God banged everything out in working order to appear in due time. Because he had other things to do besides myopically focus on us as we believe in our self centeredness he should, because we then think we can elect whether or not we reciprocate because we think we're all that just because we're here and now.

Why not just plant everything immediately? Why take 13 .82 billion years before putting Humans on Earth?

You either accept Evolution or not. And If you do, saying stuff like God's the force behind Evolution, or God has created evolution is meaningless because when you can create stuff from scratch, why create Evolution? Why not just make the products? To mess with smart people who study science?