Evolution & Creationism: Why can't people believe both?

[(Q)]

When evolution is turned into an all-encompassing theory explaining absolutely everything we believe, feel, and do as the product of natural selection, then we are not in area of science but of philosophy.

Nope. That's science. You are free to refute any claim made by evolution. But first, you must understand evolution.

If evolution is elevated to the status of a world-view of the way things are, then there is a direct conflict with biblical faith.

Why is that surprising? A great deal of reality is in direct conflict with biblical faith as is the great variety of other religions in the world.

But if evolution remains at the level of scientific biological hypothesis, it would seem that there is little reason for conflict between the implications of Christian belief in the Creator and the scientific explorations of the way which - at the level of biology - God has gone about creating his processes.

Adding unnecessary levels of complexity to an already simple process is pointless and only serves to obfuscate.

And what about morality? How does evolution explain that?

Simple really, we have evolved 'altruistic' genes, coupled with our natural instinct to survive provides us with the morality we use to help others and ourselves.

 

[davewhite04]

Simple really, we have evolved 'altruistic' genes, coupled with our natural instinct to survive provides us with the morality we use to help others and ourselves.

How long did it take to develop these "altruistic" genes?

Hmmm did you forget about WW1 and WW2?

What a short memory...

 

[redwards]

The notion may seem to you absurd but it is a fact, there has never been more casualities than there was in WW1 & WW2, technology or not. If you think there would have been provide evidence.

I haven't seen anyone crucified lately, so what? We may be less barbaric but our thoughts are the same, in some cases worse.

Wouldn't all of this argue against the notion that we were implanted with a moral compass at some point several thousand years ago? Shouldn't we have gotten better?

 

[davewhite04]

Wouldn't all of this argue against the notion that we were implanted with a moral compass at some point several thousand years ago? Shouldn't we have gotten better?

Not if we didn't believe.

 

[redwards]

How long did it take to develop these "altruistic" genes?

Hmmm did you forget about WW1 and WW2?

What a short memory...

I've explained this to you.

Altruism is based upon how closely you identify another person with yourself. By contrast, the great you consider the difference between yourself and another, the easier it is to become hostile. I doubt you would feel inclined to enslave or kill a member of your family, even if they had done something horrible. By contrast, you might have little problem condemning a stranger. Certainly, humans have a long history of prejudice towards those they perceive to be different from themselves.

 

[redwards]

Not if we didn't believe.

Not much of an implant if it doesn't work.

Gotta run, Dave. Might see ya later tonight.

 

[davewhite04]

Not much of an implant if it doesn't work.

Gotta run, Dave. Might see ya later tonight.

The implant is a choice.

You either believe what Jesus taught (peace & love) or you don't.

Some soldiers didn't have a choice.

 

[davewhite04]

Gotta run, Dave. Might see ya later tonight.

Okay, thanks for letting me know.

 

[Myles]

Thanks for taking the time to dig this up.

Let's assume they all existed, where is the evidence that any of them claimed to be the messiah before Jesus?

Where are you coming from ? Claiming something does not necessarily make it true. There are lots of people claiming to be Napoleon, ancient Egyptians and so on. Are you suggestin all such claims are credible ?

 

[davewhite04]

I've explained this to you.

Altruism is based upon how closely you identify another person with yourself. By contrast, the great you consider the difference between yourself and another, the easier it is to become hostile. I doubt you would feel inclined to enslave or kill a member of your family, even if they had done something horrible. By contrast, you might have little problem condemning a stranger. Certainly, humans have a long history of prejudice towards those they perceive to be different from themselves.

Yes, a very long history.

I just find this "altruistic" gene to be a bit of a enigma. Altruistic behaviour doesn't limit itself to ones closest associates.

 

[Myles]

The implant is a choice.

You either believe what Jesus taught (peace & love) or you don't.

Some soldiers didn't have a choice.

Why not believe what the Buddha taught?

 

[davewhite04]

Where are you coming from ? Claiming something does not necessarily make it true. There are lots of people claiming to be Napoleon, ancient Egyptians and so on. Are you suggestin all such claims are credible ?

Claiming something certainly does not make it true, I was showing an example of a prophecy.

Did Napoleon claim that many would come in his name?

 

[shichimenshyo]

Claiming something certainly does not make it true, I was showing an example of a prophecy.

Did Napoleon claim that many would come in his name?

Napoleon didnt provide something that appealed to the masses......like a promise of eternal life.

 

[davewhite04]

Why not believe what the Buddha taught?

Because I believe life has more to offer than just sitting under a tree and starving yourself.

 

[davewhite04]

Napoleon didnt provide something that appealed to the masses......like a promise of eternal life.

What has that got to do with the price of cheese?

 

[Myles]

If they weren't ignorant of a moral code then why did God say this:

Genesis 6:5-6
5 The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. 6 The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain.

Do you believe that a global flood destroyed every human being apart from Noah and his family?

If yes, then you are incorrect in saying that Adam and Eve would have taught their children about moral code.

If we look at your theory about paganism.

Genesis 11

Talks about the confusion of languages.

Genesis 12

God introduces Himself to Abraham.

There wasn't much time for paganism to develop was there? Unless there was a huge gap in time between chapters, but it doesn't read like that at all.

Ultimately why did God decide to contact Abraham?

Finally, I did actually say that paganism came before Abraham, which is what you think too I think.

Your lord seems to be subject to mood swing. Did he not look at his creation and see that it was good ? If I am right, then he lacked the knowledge to see that there were sinners waiting in the wings, So much for omniscience !

 

[davewhite04]

Did he not look at his creation and see that it was good ?

That was before the fall, but your point is valid.

 

[nova900]

Yes, this is interesting.

But let keep this in context, those were all written laws I was talking about how people know without the need of a written law of what is right and wrong.

From the ancient egyptians perspective prior to the time of moses.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma'at

*scroll down to "Declarations to Rekhti-merti-f-ent-Ma'at" *

 

[davewhite04]

From the ancient egyptians perspective prior to the time of moses.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma'at

*scroll down to "Declarations to Rekhti-merti-f-ent-Ma'at" *

Thanks.

I know about the book of the dead, the thing is to have a safe passage to the afterlife the more money you had meant the safer the passage was, the slaves had no chance.

 

[Myles]

Claiming something certainly does not make it true, I was showing an example of a prophecy.

Did Napoleon claim that many would come in his name?

Not that I know of. But the mentally impaired who believe they are Napoleon make all sorts of outrageous claims, none of which can be substantiated. That was the comparison I was making.