God and Evolution

E

Esstazq

Registered Senior Member
I'm fairly sure that this topic has been on the website before, but I didn't see it so here I go. For some reason people cannot seem to accept both God and evolution, I suppose it is a sense of pride for their beliefs. In fact, evolution and God makes fairly good sense. In Genesis, people argue that God does not live in time. I'm not sure if this argument was created many years ago, but if this idea wasn't created out of sheer protection for God, then people somehow knew to grasp the concept of time being non-existent. Anyways, if this concept of God not living in time is true, it could have taken possibly billion of years to create man. Man was molded into God's image, not neccessarily was automatically there, it may have been a process. Also note how in Genesis water creatures were created before land (though it also says the creatures in the air were created, but gives no specifics). Genesis follows evolution decently, so perhaps all that time period God was molding his simpler creatures into what he wished them to be. Just a thought :p.
 
Esstazq said:
In Genesis, people argue that God does not live in time. I'm not sure if this argument was created many years ago, but if this idea wasn't created out of sheer protection for God, then people somehow knew to grasp the concept of time being non-existent. Anyways, if this concept of God not living in time is true, it could have taken possibly billion of years to create man.
Click to expand...
I thought that your bible god was described as omnipresent=everywhere at the same time!
so how could he be living outside of time?
assuming the concept outside of time was right,how could this god do anything in time!?
being out of time,he could do nothing he would be absolutely still,for something to happen you must have action=before and after,time has to pass.
out of time is idiotic concept.

anyways imho god does not exist ;)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
pray for some intelect. :D
 
Creation and evolution are mutually exclusive – man cannot have both been designed and evolved.

Evolution occurs through a set of processes that involve natural selection, adaptation and randomness – that’s an over simplification but I hope you see my point.

If a god guided the evolutionary processes then they couldn’t be defined as evolutionary – everything would have been effectively designed.

If man is the result of an evolutionary process then his history started from very simple lifeforms and presumably is continuing to evolve into something we as yet can’t quite predict although there are many science fiction novels which describe many speculative futures for man.

But if man is to look like God then at what point in his evolutionary path will that likeness occur? Was it before we became self-aware and were primitive creatures, or is it just in our current form, or will it be when we have evolved into some form of ethereal energy lifeform?

Kat
 
All organisms adapt to their environment or risk extinction. Religion is no exception. Religion must adapt to its present environment or risk extinction. In a fast paced world such an adaptation maybe too traumatic to its followers.
 
I still do not understand why evolution and God are at such different polarities. Natural selection, survival of the fittest, I can say (though I realize I have no fact on this) that God gave each organism the will to evolve and to survive, making us the upmost able. It sounds as though I'm scratching the bottom of the barrel, but it is still argueable from a biblical point of view. Ya, so we have "sin," our animalistic insticts. That's another idea I believe, sin is just animalistic instict, such as rage and jealousy. Perhaps that is why man is supposedly born with sin because he did indeed come from an animalstic background. I suppose this arguement can go on for threads and threads, but most likely none of our dispositions will change due to pride (ha ha especially my own).
 
Esstazq said:
I still do not understand why evolution and God are at such different polarities.
Click to expand...
maybe b/c god's characteristics are so contradictory :
all knowing,allmighty,omnipresent,etc,being like that cannot exist!
www.geocities.com/inquisitive79/
we have pretty good evidence for evolution,though.
www.talkorigins.org
Ya, so we have "sin," our animalistic insticts. That's another idea I believe, sin is just animalistic instict, such as rage and jealousy.
Click to expand...
I may be wrong,but rage and jealousy seems to apply only to humans,not animals.
animals kill only to eat,to survive,while some humans kill/torture others for thrills etc,
seems like some humans are worse than animals!
 
No, anger is expressed in animals. Rage is actually in the same area in our brain as is the control for eating and breathing, so it is imbedded. All seeing, omni-potent grand poomba God 'eh? How does that go against what I originally proposed? And also, some of the bible is falsified, it's gone through countless organizational translations and each may have changed something more to their liking. The bible contradicts itself numerous times, perhaps what one may believe is actually false. Haha, I suppose I can defend as much as I breath (as can the oppossing view), and I shall leave it at that.
 
Katazia said:
Creation and evolution are mutually exclusive – man cannot have both been designed and evolved.
Click to expand...
Leave it to arrogant fundamentalism to proscribe the methods available to the Lord. :p

You're correct, Esstazq, evolution does not preclude God(s). So?
 
In response to Consequent, so cannot the evolutionists and theologians just get along? :D Religion actually makes MORE sense if the idea of evolution is parralleled with it. Evolution also gets the support of the one area that has been majorly fending it off in a nearly idiotic struggle. Oh, and think about this one, if man evolved beyond man, that man may completely lose the rage passed down through eons of evolution. That would mean someone who has absolutely no malice or "evil" thought in his mind is a step of evolution above man. Yes, this sounds like something so fantastic so forgive me :p. Please, give me your criticism and be gentle :eek: .
 
Last edited:
Esstazq said:
In response to Consequent, so cannot the evolutionists and theologians just get along?
Click to expand...
Evolution and theology can and do get along.

Esstazq said:
Religion actually makes MORE sense if the idea of evolution is parralleled with it.
Click to expand...
In what possible way does religion make more sense? The God of the Gap simply occupies less territory.

Esstazq said:
Evolution also gets the support of the one area that has been majorly fending it off in a nearly idiotic struggle.
Click to expand...
Evolution is not a political position needing support from one area or another. Evolution, as in the change in allele frequency over time, is an observed fact. Evolution, as in Gradualism or Punctuated Equilibrium, is a set of theories seeking to explain those facts. What is important is not the support of religion, but its noninterference in the endeavors of science.

Esstazq said:
Oh, and think about this one, if man evolved beyond man, that man may completely lose the rage passed down through eons of evolution.
Click to expand...
Or it may mean something entirely different. Evolution is a sieve, not a ladder.

Esstazq said:
Yes, this sounds like something so fantastic so forgive me :p. Please, give me your criticism and be gentle.
Click to expand...
You have every right to your fantasies just so long as you recognize them as such. Shabbat shalome.
 
"Evolution is not a political position needing support from one area or another. Evolution, as in the change in allele frequency over time, is an observed fact. Evolution, as in Gradualism or Punctuated Equilibrium, is a set of theories"

Ah, aren't you the smart contradictory man. Please, if you wish to sound intelligent do so with a brain. Also, my initial question in my previous post was rhetorical--as an answer to your "So?"

"Or it may mean something entirely different. Evolution is a sieve, not a ladder."

Again, a slight contradiction. So evolution sifts out? Oh...wouldn't that mean that the property of rage would be sifted? Hrmm...gotta think about that one. A ladder would mean that it builds upon something below it, I believe that is what you're aiming for. Remember my good buddy, brain. (Ah and forgive me for my lack of quote status to your quotes, I'm ignorant in the ways of the forum language)
 
Q25 said:
animals kill only to eat,to survive,while some humans kill/torture others for thrills etc
Click to expand...

In the novel Tarzan, the panther is mentioned as the only jungle animal that "tortures" its prey.
Is this true?


Esstazq said:
"Or it may mean something entirely different. Evolution is a sieve, not a ladder."

Again, a slight contradiction. So evolution sifts out? Oh...wouldn't that mean that the property of rage would be sifted? Hrmm...gotta think about that one. A ladder would mean that it builds upon something below it, I believe that is what you're aiming for. Remember my good buddy, brain.
Click to expand...


Ok.













Seriously, what are you, ten years old?
 
Last edited:
Yes, I am ten. What of it? Please, tell me what in that statement gives me grand ten-year old status. I feel young again.
 
I still do not understand why evolution and God are at such different polarities. Natural selection, survival of the fittest, I can say (though I realize I have no fact on this) that God gave each organism the will to evolve and to survive, making us the upmost able.
Click to expand...
Actually, to my surprise, when I read that statement I agreed.

What you are pretty much saying is that God must know that the environment changes over time. Therefore, it only makes sense that he makes a creation which can adapt to suit that environment. Thus, the process of evolution.

Great thought!
It's so simple, it's amazing...
Now, all we have to do is explain it to the fundies! :D

"Or it may mean something entirely different. Evolution is a sieve, not a ladder."

Again, a slight contradiction. So evolution sifts out? Oh...wouldn't that mean that the property of rage would be sifted? Hrmm...gotta think about that one. A ladder would mean that it builds upon something below it, I believe that is what you're aiming for. Remember my good buddy, brain.
Click to expand...
Well, that's rude. I fail to see how it is a contradiction. He was being techical, since it is incorrect to say that evolution ALWAYS proceeds for simplicity to complexity. There are instances where it doesn't (legged whales losing legs, cave fish losing eyes). Sometimes loses in complexity and information can improve an organism.

Evolution sieves out bad qualities. The weak, the poorly adapted, they all die.

Who is to say that anger is a bad quality? Maybe amongst humans, but aggression is ESSENTIAL if you are to survive in the animal kingdom. You often need to fight for life, shelter, food or a mate. It doesn't pay to be a pacifist.
Nice guys finish last.
 
Last edited:
True, mountain. I suppose it was a rude comment :p. That aside, couldn't species accomplish a lot more if they worked in perfect unison? One can again counter this arguement by saying, "What if there is not enough resources to support the whole party?" Well technically, regardless of an animal's suppossed strength, if there are no resources it will die. Also, if man works together to solve these problems then perhaps they will not arise (some many people are sheer gluttons and waste beyond imaginable). Man could also drop his inhibitions to combine intellectual powers to their maximum, perhaps fully achieving his goals. Someone could also say, "Wouldn't we just be mindless zombies, beind constantly nice and all?" No, I'm not showing any malice to mountain right now and I am expressing a differing opinion. Lastly, when I say rage, I connect that with an malicious act. If you think about it, malice has held back the human race quite a few centuries. Wars, unable to share ideas because of previous quarrel, and many other sorts of idiotic bouts have stifled human progression. I also believe (goes along with war) rage is connected to the animal lust for power. Animals have a natural instict to be the best and that is imbedded in man. Also, I was reading the bible last night. In a footnote it said "this is absolute proof that God and evolution could not coexist." Alas, when I looked up the scriptures it spoke of him creating. Come on here! WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE FOOTNOTE WRITERS?! Man could be God's "creation" by him molding us. That is like saying that the change of a piece of clay to a vase is evolution, I did not create the vase. Really makes me wonder why people just do not understand that... Make sure you make some replies mountain :p
 
Esstazq said:
Please, if you wish to sound intelligent do so with a brain. Also, my initial question in my previous post was rhetorical--as an answer to your "So?"
Click to expand...
You're really not very good at this.

Esstazq said:
Again, a slight contradiction. So evolution sifts out? Oh...wouldn't that mean that the property of rage would be sifted?
Click to expand...
No. It would not mean that. You clearly understand nothing about evolution.
 
Ah, aren't you the smart contradictory man. Please, if you wish to sound intelligent do so with a brain.
Click to expand...
Consequent was in no way contradictory in that statement. Read what he said again.

From ConsequentAtheist's post:
"Evolution, as in the change in allele frequency over time, is an observed fact. Evolution, as in Gradualism or Punctuated Equilibrium, is a set of theories seeking to explain those facts."
So evolution sifts out? Oh...wouldn't that mean that the property of rage would be sifted?
Click to expand...
Only if rage were a disadvantage selectively. Meaning, if rage was an undesirable trait, in that the organism had a smaller chance of survival by having it, then it would be sieved out. Evolution refers more to genetics in this sense.
 
Idle, I'm just saying it was contradictory because he claimed it was a fact then compared it directly to a theory. It is a theory, not a fact. In regards to the sieve, I'm not saying that it is a ladder. Consequent says "Or it may mean something entirely different. Evolution is a sieve, not a ladder." Something entirely different would mean that the idea of the loss of rage is not happening. Yet if it was a sieve this possibility exists. Also idle, if one is a strong evolutionary wouldn't you say that the introduction of "emotions" increases with the complexity of the organism? Perhaps emotion is genetic. Depression has been linked to a chemical imbalance, so depression is considered genetic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top