God-guided evolution......
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-11-2016, 11:42 AM
RE: God-guided evolution......
(28-11-2016 10:07 AM)jason197754 Wrote:  How would you respond to someone who believes both in God and in evolution???

God is a belief. Evolution is an easily-observable fact, well-known to anyone who has actually studied biology without a pre-formed ideology that prevents them from seeing what is the most clearly-evidenced idea in all of science.

A Christian who accepts evolution is exactly the same as a Christian who accepts gravity... it's not really grounds for applause, now is it? And the same is true for those who reject both (or either).

Your thread title suggests that God needed to "guide" evolution. Some/many Christians think this. However, Christians who are biologists (and my wife is one) think that evolution is 100% natural (a guide is not necessary), and that God simply created the natural world/universe (starting at the Big Bang) with the laws set in such a way that evolution would happen based on the natural way chemicals interact... thus bringing about the Grand Plan™ of intelligent life that could recognize and worship its creator.

In other words, every element of Creation following the First Mover Incident™ is part of the Plan, and does not require God to use magic to intervene (or "meddle") in order to enact that Plan, because that would imply that the Plan was flawed from the outset, requiring intervention to "fix" it. Evolution is thus a part, like every other natural phenomenon, of the mechanism of Creation, and a Christian who studies science is discovering the fingerprints of the Creator in the natural creation.

So if the person with whom you're speaking wants to assert that evolution requires interventional magic, politely tell them that the Christians who are at the top of the field find that idea insulting to the Creator.

Magic is the opposite of science, not part of it.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
28-11-2016, 01:12 PM
RE: God-guided evolution......
(28-11-2016 10:19 AM)pablo Wrote:  If god can start life, why not life that doesn't need millions of years to evolve?

Apparently he likes inefficiency.........

Because, come on --- he decides he wants a "do-over" -- so he has to get some drunk to build a boat, get a bunch of animals together, stick 'em on the boat --- then flash flood the whole planet?????

I don't think I could possibly come up with a more Rube Goldberg way of handling a problem than that.......

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes onlinebiker's post
28-11-2016, 01:23 PM
RE: God-guided evolution......
(28-11-2016 10:07 AM)jason197754 Wrote:  How would you respond to someone who believes both in God and in evolution???
Besides what has already been said, it shows that the Bible is not inerrant because evolution is incompatible with Genesis. So that then begs the question: what else the Bible wrong about? So it's good for potentially planting at least one seed of doubt.

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2016, 01:51 PM
RE: God-guided evolution......
I don't see why evolution requires intent, purpose, or the "intelligent" guidance of a supernatural overseer. It works just as well without any such role. If they want to believe there is some higher power guiding the process that's their choice but wouldn't it be a lot simpler and a much less exhaustive use of that overseer's time to just create the various organisms of earth in their final stage of development?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mr. Boston's post
28-11-2016, 02:00 PM
RE: God-guided evolution......
(28-11-2016 11:28 AM)tomilay Wrote:  They are worse than creationists. Because they have no integrity.

Why?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2016, 02:54 PM
RE: God-guided evolution......
(28-11-2016 02:00 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(28-11-2016 11:28 AM)tomilay Wrote:  They are worse than creationists. Because they have no integrity.

Why?

A creationist believes God created the world in a week and put everything as is. They take the Bible literally. It's problematic for obvious reasons. But they are pretty consistent about it. You know where they are.

This other breed, usually Roman Catholics, are a little different. They want to have their cake and eat it. So they take refuge in ambiguity. Neither rejecting nor fully embracing the creation story. In other words, they will agree with you if you say the creation story is true. And they will also agree with you if you say, no, evolution explains everything.

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning ~ Werner Heisenberg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2016, 03:40 PM
RE: God-guided evolution......
(28-11-2016 10:07 AM)jason197754 Wrote:  How would you respond to someone who believes both in God and in evolution???

A belief in a god, and an acceptance of evolution are mutually incompatible in my opinion, but.....

See Theistic Evolution.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-11-2016, 03:57 PM
RE: God-guided evolution......
(28-11-2016 10:07 AM)jason197754 Wrote:  How would you respond to someone who believes both in God and in evolution???

They're going to run headfirst into the problem of evil. Does god mutate viruses to resist vaccinations on a continual basis?

Then they might default to the original sin myth to explain why creation is "corrupted".

Then they run right into the buzz saw of science, disease, suffering, etc. is in no way linked to humans, there are entire fields of science dedicated to the study of diseases
in ancient animals long before any humans walked the Earth.

Paleopathology

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheInquisition's post
28-11-2016, 04:30 PM
RE: God-guided evolution......
(28-11-2016 02:54 PM)tomilay Wrote:  
(28-11-2016 02:00 PM)Aliza Wrote:  Why?

A creationist believes God created the world in a week and put everything as is. They take the Bible literally. It's problematic for obvious reasons. But they are pretty consistent about it. You know where they are.

This other breed, usually Roman Catholics, are a little different. They want to have their cake and eat it. So they take refuge in ambiguity. Neither rejecting nor fully embracing the creation story. In other words, they will agree with you if you say the creation story is true. And they will also agree with you if you say, no, evolution explains everything.

I lean toward a G-d guided evolution, though not the version you’re probably thinking. Suffice it to say, I don’t agree that someone’s belief in a G-d guided evolution, whether it’s my version or a Christian’s version, should impact another person, assuming that the believer isn’t trying to sell them on the idea. Most people who know me would say that I have very high integrity. My belief in this idea does not impact me the way I think you think it should.

I’ve never once put “God” on a test in any of my science classes. I’ve never included this in any of my papers and I’ve never suggested it when asked to participate in a classroom discussion. I think someone who chooses to have this view, and can effectively separate it from their understanding of evolution has plenty of integrity. These are people who can examine and accept evidence without bias –even when that evidence doesn’t support their preconceptions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Aliza's post
28-11-2016, 06:29 PM
RE: God-guided evolution......
(28-11-2016 04:30 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(28-11-2016 02:54 PM)tomilay Wrote:  A creationist believes God created the world in a week and put everything as is. They take the Bible literally. It's problematic for obvious reasons. But they are pretty consistent about it. You know where they are.

This other breed, usually Roman Catholics, are a little different. They want to have their cake and eat it. So they take refuge in ambiguity. Neither rejecting nor fully embracing the creation story. In other words, they will agree with you if you say the creation story is true. And they will also agree with you if you say, no, evolution explains everything.

I lean toward a G-d guided evolution, though not the version you’re probably thinking.

What does your version of God guided evolution say?

(28-11-2016 04:30 PM)Aliza Wrote:  Suffice it to say, I don’t agree that someone’s belief in a G-d guided evolution, whether it’s my version or a Christian’s version, should impact another person, assuming that the believer isn’t trying to sell them on the idea. Most people who know me would say that I have very high integrity. My belief in this idea does not impact me the way I think you think it should.

I am referring to the integrity of their arguments with regards to evolution and the creation story. Not their personal integrity. For example the acceptance of a literal genesis and evolution simultaneously.

A creationist has one consistent argument. The almighty did it. God can do anything. His argument is in one neat package. He stands by it. He owns it. At least you know what he is saying.

The theistic evolutionist recognizes that evolution is a game changer to the genesis story. But instead of fully embracing it, he tries to bring them under one roof. The days in genesis become eons or something looser; everything that is demonstrably untrue becomes metaphor...but he cannot discard it as it is divinely inspired.

That is more problematic from the perspective of integrity. More so because Catholics(I am a former Roman Catholic) will say that you are free to believe either version, theistic evolution or genesis. That while you can even completely reject theistic evolution version you can "reject" the genesis version only in an oblique fashion, by treating it as a metaphor.

This approach lacks integrity. It engenders a willingness to hold a loosely defined possibly moving target(genesis) as being in reality the same thing as a scientifically verifiable fact. It's just not clear what they are saying. That is why I find the creationist position more respectable.

(28-11-2016 04:30 PM)Aliza Wrote:  I think someone who chooses to have this view, and can effectively separate it from their understanding of evolution has plenty of integrity. These are people who can examine and accept evidence without bias –even when that evidence doesn’t support their preconceptions.

The way understand this, is that people can compartmentalize and avoid cognitive dissonance.

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning ~ Werner Heisenberg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes tomilay's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: