Total Posts:40|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Is God Incompatible with Evolution

stubs
Posts: 1,887
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2012 11:27:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I wish to continue the discussion started by this debate http://debate.org... . If you want to read/vote on it thats cool too, but I want others opinions on the subject.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2012 11:48:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I didn't read the debate, but I don't see how they could be possibly be incoherent.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Muted
Posts: 377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 12:01:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Burp. I didn't make much of a good case although I could have....
Exterminate!!!!!!-Dalek.

The ability to speak does not make you a competent debater.

One does not simply do the rain dance.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 11:52:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Gods are not incompatible with evolution. In the USA, most theists believe in evolution, and most evolutionists are theists. If a god could make a virgin birth, it could make evolution.
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 11:58:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Nah, or at least I don't think so.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 12:27:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
A God, is compatible with everything.

However, THEE God, is not.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 12:30:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 11:52:27 AM, wiploc wrote:
Gods are not incompatible with evolution. In the USA, most theists believe in evolution, and most evolutionists are theists. If a god could make a virgin birth, it could make evolution.

Humans can make a virgin birth as well. It's called "artificial insemination".

What is a god? The concept of god seems to vary from culture to culture. Some far east religions see gods as mortal with a longer life span, whereas western religions tend to see the gods as immortal. Although some Pagan religions believe the immortals can be killed; such as Cronos choking on a rock. The only consistency is that Gods are conscious manifestations of aspects of nature and society.

If gods are a manifestation of aspects of nature, and evolution is an aspect of nature, than couldn't there be a god of evolution?
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 1:16:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 11:52:27 AM, wiploc wrote:
Gods are not incompatible with evolution. In the USA, most theists believe in evolution, and most evolutionists are theists. If a god could make a virgin birth, it could make evolution.

Doubful, considering that almost half believe the earth is 6-10,000 years old.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 1:49:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 1:16:12 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 11/14/2012 11:52:27 AM, wiploc wrote:
Gods are not incompatible with evolution. In the USA, most theists believe in evolution, and most evolutionists are theists. If a god could make a virgin birth, it could make evolution.

Doubful, considering that almost half believe the earth is 6-10,000 years old.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Hey, if Jehovah could magically hide all the water after the flood, then he could also magically run the whole of evolution in fifteen minutes on the third day.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 1:53:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 1:16:12 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 11/14/2012 11:52:27 AM, wiploc wrote:
Gods are not incompatible with evolution. In the USA, most theists believe in evolution, and most evolutionists are theists. If a god could make a virgin birth, it could make evolution.

Doubful, considering that almost half believe the earth is 6-10,000 years old.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

I don't know about theists, but Americans generally accept evolution more than reject it (albeit by a narrow margin). http://news.nationalgeographic.com...
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 1:58:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Also in regards to the OP, there is no limit to how far Christianity can be diluted and metaphorized. I actually enjoy and support the trend.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 1:59:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 1:58:11 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Also in regards to the OP, there is no limit to how far Christianity can be diluted and metaphorized. I actually enjoy and support the trend.

Yup. St. Augustine was trying to dilute and metaphorize a literal teaching of Christianity.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
stubs
Posts: 1,887
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 5:26:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 12:27:59 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
A God, is compatible with everything.

However, THEE God, is not.

Could you explain your position more?
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 6:13:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 5:26:38 PM, stubs wrote:
At 11/14/2012 12:27:59 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
A God, is compatible with everything.

However, THEE God, is not.

Could you explain your position more?

Sure. It's fathomable that a God could have guided the process of evolution. If there is no known fact about God or what he does (beside create things, obviously), then evolution wouldn't be the slightest bit exempt from being a guided//created process.

However, I believe that God is knowable (not in entirety), and that he's made himself known through the word (bible). So, not only is evolution mere imagination and wishfull thinking, but it contradicts central aspects of God's law and word. Since it contradicts these things I understand to be the canon of knowledge, and believe THEE God to be the God of the bible-- God is incompatible with Evolution.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 7:31:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 11:52:27 AM, wiploc wrote:
Gods are not incompatible with evolution. In the USA, most theists believe in evolution, and most evolutionists are theists. If a god could make a virgin birth, it could make evolution.

1. The fact that some group of people believe in A and B doesn't make A and B compatible concepts.

2. The mere concept of god isn't incompatible with evolution, I'll admit. However, some specific concepts of gods can be. For example, if I define a god as having created everything in a manner that is explicitly contradictory to the methods of evolution, then that god is incompatible with evolution.

So, extend this concept to the Christian God... but first, some set-up.

Our classification of organisms into discrete categories (species) is at odds with the spectrum of life evolution shows us is actually the case. In short, our attempt to categorize life runs into the Sorites paradox. By and large, it doesn't have much practical impact, as there are enough gaps in living species as to not bring the paradox to bear except in extreme cases. One notable case is the case of Ring Species. No two neighboring groups are sufficiently different to be classified as different species, yet neighbors that are far enough apart are. This leads to the Sorites paradox in the sense that, starting at any point in the ring, you can go from group to group without ever changing species yet, by the time you get to the other end, you have changed species!

This isn't a simply failing of humans that could be overcome with some sufficiently designed categorization scheme, either; it is a paradox inherent in the attempt to assign discrete labels to something which undergoes minute changes that don't, in themselves, require a change in labeling. Since it is a logical paradox, a god could no more overcome it than it could create a square circle, a married bachelor, or a rock so heavy it can't lift it.

Thus, and god that attempts to treat living organisms as actually fitting into discrete labels is acting in a manner in contrary to evolution, and I believe the Christian God does this, by way of souls.

If you believe in evolution, then you believe that humans are descendant from some non-human ancestor at some point in the past. However, there isn't any singular point at which humans "appear." Tracing species back in such a manner is, essentially, a temporal version of what Ring Species are geographically. There isn't enough change from generation to generation to warrant a determination of specification.

Yet, if we are to accept the Christian God, we are to accept the idea of souls. But when did souls enter the picture? Even if you believe animals have souls, humans clearly have souls that are different and distinct. To suggest that only humans have this kind of soul is to suggest that there was a distinct set of first humans which violates the spectrum of life evolution suggests.
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 8:37:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 7:31:35 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/14/2012 11:52:27 AM, wiploc wrote:
Gods are not incompatible with evolution. In the USA, most theists believe in evolution, and most evolutionists are theists. If a god could make a virgin birth, it could make evolution.

1. The fact that some group of people believe in A and B doesn't make A and B compatible concepts.

2. The mere concept of god isn't incompatible with evolution, I'll admit. However, some specific concepts of gods can be. For example, if I define a god as having created everything in a manner that is explicitly contradictory to the methods of evolution, then that god is incompatible with evolution.

So, extend this concept to the Christian God... but first, some set-up.

Our classification of organisms into discrete categories (species) is at odds with the spectrum of life evolution shows us is actually the case. In short, our attempt to categorize life runs into the Sorites paradox. By and large, it doesn't have much practical impact, as there are enough gaps in living species as to not bring the paradox to bear except in extreme cases. One notable case is the case of Ring Species. No two neighboring groups are sufficiently different to be classified as different species, yet neighbors that are far enough apart are. This leads to the Sorites paradox in the sense that, starting at any point in the ring, you can go from group to group without ever changing species yet, by the time you get to the other end, you have changed species!

This isn't a simply failing of humans that could be overcome with some sufficiently designed categorization scheme, either; it is a paradox inherent in the attempt to assign discrete labels to something which undergoes minute changes that don't, in themselves, require a change in labeling. Since it is a logical paradox, a god could no more overcome it than it could create a square circle, a married bachelor, or a rock so heavy it can't lift it.

Thus, and god that attempts to treat living organisms as actually fitting into discrete labels is acting in a manner in contrary to evolution, and I believe the Christian God does this, by way of souls.

If you believe in evolution, then you believe that humans are descendant from some non-human ancestor at some point in the past. However, there isn't any singular point at which humans "appear." Tracing species back in such a manner is, essentially, a temporal version of what Ring Species are geographically. There isn't enough change from generation to generation to warrant a determination of specification.

Yet, if we are to accept the Christian God, we are to accept the idea of souls. But when did souls enter the picture? Even if you believe animals have souls, humans clearly have souls that are different and distinct. To suggest that only humans have this kind of soul is to suggest that there was a distinct set of first humans which violates the spectrum of life evolution suggests.

That's quite interesting, but I believe the concept of soul to be a reference to the patterns in our brains. Humans are information, and that's what survives after death.
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 8:44:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 8:37:48 PM, MouthWash wrote:
At 11/14/2012 7:31:35 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/14/2012 11:52:27 AM, wiploc wrote:
Gods are not incompatible with evolution. In the USA, most theists believe in evolution, and most evolutionists are theists. If a god could make a virgin birth, it could make evolution.

1. The fact that some group of people believe in A and B doesn't make A and B compatible concepts.

2. The mere concept of god isn't incompatible with evolution, I'll admit. However, some specific concepts of gods can be. For example, if I define a god as having created everything in a manner that is explicitly contradictory to the methods of evolution, then that god is incompatible with evolution.

So, extend this concept to the Christian God... but first, some set-up.

Our classification of organisms into discrete categories (species) is at odds with the spectrum of life evolution shows us is actually the case. In short, our attempt to categorize life runs into the Sorites paradox. By and large, it doesn't have much practical impact, as there are enough gaps in living species as to not bring the paradox to bear except in extreme cases. One notable case is the case of Ring Species. No two neighboring groups are sufficiently different to be classified as different species, yet neighbors that are far enough apart are. This leads to the Sorites paradox in the sense that, starting at any point in the ring, you can go from group to group without ever changing species yet, by the time you get to the other end, you have changed species!

This isn't a simply failing of humans that could be overcome with some sufficiently designed categorization scheme, either; it is a paradox inherent in the attempt to assign discrete labels to something which undergoes minute changes that don't, in themselves, require a change in labeling. Since it is a logical paradox, a god could no more overcome it than it could create a square circle, a married bachelor, or a rock so heavy it can't lift it.

Thus, and god that attempts to treat living organisms as actually fitting into discrete labels is acting in a manner in contrary to evolution, and I believe the Christian God does this, by way of souls.

If you believe in evolution, then you believe that humans are descendant from some non-human ancestor at some point in the past. However, there isn't any singular point at which humans "appear." Tracing species back in such a manner is, essentially, a temporal version of what Ring Species are geographically. There isn't enough change from generation to generation to warrant a determination of specification.

Yet, if we are to accept the Christian God, we are to accept the idea of souls. But when did souls enter the picture? Even if you believe animals have souls, humans clearly have souls that are different and distinct. To suggest that only humans have this kind of soul is to suggest that there was a distinct set of first humans which violates the spectrum of life evolution suggests.

That's quite interesting, but I believe the concept of soul to be a reference to the patterns in our brains. Humans are information, and that's what survives after death.

That doesn't fix anything.
stubs
Posts: 1,887
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2012 9:37:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 6:13:44 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:

Sure. It's fathomable that a God could have guided the process of evolution. If there is no known fact about God or what he does (beside create things, obviously), then evolution wouldn't be the slightest bit exempt from being a guided//created process.

However, I believe that God is knowable (not in entirety), and that he's made himself known through the word (bible). So, not only is evolution mere imagination and wishfull thinking, but it contradicts central aspects of God's law and word. Since it contradicts these things I understand to be the canon of knowledge, and believe THEE God to be the God of the bible-- God is incompatible with Evolution.

What specifically?
Muted
Posts: 377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 5:21:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
It's a good thing I didn't favorite this thread.
Exterminate!!!!!!-Dalek.

The ability to speak does not make you a competent debater.

One does not simply do the rain dance.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 11:58:47 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
It's compatible, but it's a stretch. That's my take. Evolution is a wasteful process, many creatures have to suffer and die off so the fittest can continue to reproduce. I don't really see why an omnibenevolent God chose to create beings in such a cruel way, but I guess Christians can find some way to stretch it and make it work if they also believe in evolution. I respect that more than the silly creationist notion that everything was created in one pop, as it is.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 12:15:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/15/2012 11:58:47 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It's compatible, but it's a stretch. That's my take. Evolution is a wasteful process, many creatures have to suffer and die off so the fittest can continue to reproduce. I don't really see why an omnibenevolent God chose to create beings in such a cruel way, but I guess Christians can find some way to stretch it and make it work if they also believe in evolution. I respect that more than the silly creationist notion that everything was created in one pop, as it is.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Nidhogg
Posts: 503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 2:11:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/15/2012 11:58:47 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It's compatible, but it's a stretch. That's my take. Evolution is a wasteful process, many creatures have to suffer and die off so the fittest can continue to reproduce. I don't really see why an omnibenevolent God chose to create beings in such a cruel way, but I guess Christians can find some way to stretch it and make it work if they also believe in evolution. I respect that more than the silly creationist notion that everything was created in one pop, as it is.

I do not believe that everything was made in one pop as is, I think that forms of life were created that adapted into our current life forms. don't believe that bacteria decided one day to become a multicellular organism. I also don't think that organism would have been able to evolve into everything we now know in just a couple billion years.
Ridiculously Photogenic Debater

DDO's most mediocre member since at least a year ago
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 2:39:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/15/2012 2:11:13 PM, Nidhogg wrote:
At 11/15/2012 11:58:47 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It's compatible, but it's a stretch. That's my take. Evolution is a wasteful process, many creatures have to suffer and die off so the fittest can continue to reproduce. I don't really see why an omnibenevolent God chose to create beings in such a cruel way, but I guess Christians can find some way to stretch it and make it work if they also believe in evolution. I respect that more than the silly creationist notion that everything was created in one pop, as it is.

I do not believe that everything was made in one pop as is, I think that forms of life were created that adapted into our current life forms. don't believe that bacteria decided one day to become a multicellular organism.

Bacteria doesn't "decide" anything. Regardless, if single celled organisms keeps changing and improving, it's no stretch to think that they would break the multicellular threshold.

I also don't think that organism would have been able to evolve into everything we now know in just a couple billion years.

Well, unfortunately for you, this is what the evidence suggests. Also, what do you mean by "just"? A couple billion years is a long, long time.
Nidhogg
Posts: 503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 2:44:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/15/2012 2:39:42 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 11/15/2012 2:11:13 PM, Nidhogg wrote:
At 11/15/2012 11:58:47 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It's compatible, but it's a stretch. That's my take. Evolution is a wasteful process, many creatures have to suffer and die off so the fittest can continue to reproduce. I don't really see why an omnibenevolent God chose to create beings in such a cruel way, but I guess Christians can find some way to stretch it and make it work if they also believe in evolution. I respect that more than the silly creationist notion that everything was created in one pop, as it is.

I do not believe that everything was made in one pop as is, I think that forms of life were created that adapted into our current life forms. don't believe that bacteria decided one day to become a multicellular organism.

Bacteria doesn't "decide" anything. Regardless, if single celled organisms keeps changing and improving,

Like what improvements? Can you provide an example you have observed?

it's no stretch to think that they would break the multicellular threshold.

Because I keep improving, I will one day grow wings and fly!

I also don't think that organism would have been able to evolve into everything we now know in just a couple billion years.

Well, unfortunately for you, this is what the evidence suggests.

What Evidence?

Also, what do you mean by "just"? A couple billion years is a long, long time.

Not on a cosmic scale, especially if evolution occurs very slowly.
Ridiculously Photogenic Debater

DDO's most mediocre member since at least a year ago
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 3:22:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/15/2012 2:44:36 PM, Nidhogg wrote:
At 11/15/2012 2:39:42 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 11/15/2012 2:11:13 PM, Nidhogg wrote:
At 11/15/2012 11:58:47 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It's compatible, but it's a stretch. That's my take. Evolution is a wasteful process, many creatures have to suffer and die off so the fittest can continue to reproduce. I don't really see why an omnibenevolent God chose to create beings in such a cruel way, but I guess Christians can find some way to stretch it and make it work if they also believe in evolution. I respect that more than the silly creationist notion that everything was created in one pop, as it is.

I do not believe that everything was made in one pop as is, I think that forms of life were created that adapted into our current life forms. don't believe that bacteria decided one day to become a multicellular organism.

Bacteria doesn't "decide" anything. Regardless, if single celled organisms keeps changing and improving,

Like what improvements? Can you provide an example you have observed?

Viruses change and improve to the point where are vaccines no longer work, and they have to be redesigned. This has been observed countless times.


it's no stretch to think that they would break the multicellular threshold.

Because I keep improving, I will one day grow wings and fly!

Not you (you will only be alive till your around 80 - 100 ). However, given millions and billions of years there is no telling what will evolve and branch off from the human species.


I also don't think that organism would have been able to evolve into everything we now know in just a couple billion years.

Well, unfortunately for you, this is what the evidence suggests.

What Evidence?

Fossil records, DNA.


Also, what do you mean by "just"? A couple billion years is a long, long time.

Not on a cosmic scale, especially if evolution occurs very slowly.

Something that takes billions of years to happen, does happen slowly lol Come on now...
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 4:04:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 9:37:56 PM, stubs wrote:
At 11/14/2012 6:13:44 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:

Sure. It's fathomable that a God could have guided the process of evolution. If there is no known fact about God or what he does (beside create things, obviously), then evolution wouldn't be the slightest bit exempt from being a guided//created process.

However, I believe that God is knowable (not in entirety), and that he's made himself known through the word (bible). So, not only is evolution mere imagination and wishfull thinking, but it contradicts central aspects of God's law and word. Since it contradicts these things I understand to be the canon of knowledge, and believe THEE God to be the God of the bible-- God is incompatible with Evolution.

What specifically?


I believe the incarnation of God as a man would be severed deeply by the inclusion of evolution. If God came to save man, and thus came as a man, but man is merely a branch in the evolutionary tree, and related to every other creature (whether near or far), then we were not made in his image, and Christ's sacrifice would be for animals too.. which of course, is false.

The creation narrative, if believed to be completely true, doesn't allow any possibility of man coming from a previous species of animal. Man was created from the earth (dust). If man evolved from other creatures, then he was not created from the earth. Though some could stretch abiogenesis to include mans beginning from the earth.

If those aren't enough, we must look at sin and death. If creatures died before adam and eve sinned, as the aledged fossil records suggest, then we have an enormous contradiction.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 4:13:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/14/2012 8:44:49 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/14/2012 8:37:48 PM, MouthWash wrote:
At 11/14/2012 7:31:35 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 11/14/2012 11:52:27 AM, wiploc wrote:
Gods are not incompatible with evolution. In the USA, most theists believe in evolution, and most evolutionists are theists. If a god could make a virgin birth, it could make evolution.

1. The fact that some group of people believe in A and B doesn't make A and B compatible concepts.

2. The mere concept of god isn't incompatible with evolution, I'll admit. However, some specific concepts of gods can be. For example, if I define a god as having created everything in a manner that is explicitly contradictory to the methods of evolution, then that god is incompatible with evolution.

So, extend this concept to the Christian God... but first, some set-up.

Our classification of organisms into discrete categories (species) is at odds with the spectrum of life evolution shows us is actually the case. In short, our attempt to categorize life runs into the Sorites paradox. By and large, it doesn't have much practical impact, as there are enough gaps in living species as to not bring the paradox to bear except in extreme cases. One notable case is the case of Ring Species. No two neighboring groups are sufficiently different to be classified as different species, yet neighbors that are far enough apart are. This leads to the Sorites paradox in the sense that, starting at any point in the ring, you can go from group to group without ever changing species yet, by the time you get to the other end, you have changed species!

This isn't a simply failing of humans that could be overcome with some sufficiently designed categorization scheme, either; it is a paradox inherent in the attempt to assign discrete labels to something which undergoes minute changes that don't, in themselves, require a change in labeling. Since it is a logical paradox, a god could no more overcome it than it could create a square circle, a married bachelor, or a rock so heavy it can't lift it.

Thus, and god that attempts to treat living organisms as actually fitting into discrete labels is acting in a manner in contrary to evolution, and I believe the Christian God does this, by way of souls.

If you believe in evolution, then you believe that humans are descendant from some non-human ancestor at some point in the past. However, there isn't any singular point at which humans "appear." Tracing species back in such a manner is, essentially, a temporal version of what Ring Species are geographically. There isn't enough change from generation to generation to warrant a determination of specification.

Yet, if we are to accept the Christian God, we are to accept the idea of souls. But when did souls enter the picture? Even if you believe animals have souls, humans clearly have souls that are different and distinct. To suggest that only humans have this kind of soul is to suggest that there was a distinct set of first humans which violates the spectrum of life evolution suggests.

That's quite interesting, but I believe the concept of soul to be a reference to the patterns in our brains. Humans are information, and that's what survives after death.

That doesn't fix anything.

Why not? Animals have souls too, according this philosophy.
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 4:14:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/15/2012 11:58:47 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
It's compatible, but it's a stretch. That's my take. Evolution is a wasteful process, many creatures have to suffer and die off so the fittest can continue to reproduce. I don't really see why an omnibenevolent God chose to create beings in such a cruel way, but I guess Christians can find some way to stretch it and make it work if they also believe in evolution. I respect that more than the silly creationist notion that everything was created in one pop, as it is.

That isn't really saying anything other than "THE PROBLEM OF EVIL."
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2012 4:19:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/15/2012 4:04:12 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 11/14/2012 9:37:56 PM, stubs wrote:
At 11/14/2012 6:13:44 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:

Sure. It's fathomable that a God could have guided the process of evolution. If there is no known fact about God or what he does (beside create things, obviously), then evolution wouldn't be the slightest bit exempt from being a guided//created process.

However, I believe that God is knowable (not in entirety), and that he's made himself known through the word (bible). So, not only is evolution mere imagination and wishfull thinking, but it contradicts central aspects of God's law and word. Since it contradicts these things I understand to be the canon of knowledge, and believe THEE God to be the God of the bible-- God is incompatible with Evolution.

What specifically?


I believe the incarnation of God as a man would be severed deeply by the inclusion of evolution. If God came to save man, and thus came as a man, but man is merely a branch in the evolutionary tree, and related to every other creature (whether near or far), then we were not made in his image,

lolwut

and Christ's sacrifice would be for animals too.. which of course, is false.

The creation narrative, if believed to be completely true, doesn't allow any possibility of man coming from a previous species of animal. Man was created from the earth (dust). If man evolved from other creatures, then he was not created from the earth. Though some could stretch abiogenesis to include mans beginning from the earth.

You mean 'the creation narrative, if believed to be completely literal'.

If those aren't enough, we must look at sin and death. If creatures died before adam and eve sinned, as the aledged fossil records suggest, then we have an enormous contradiction.

The creatures wouldn't have been human, though.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13