Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What if someone told you that God told them He used evolution to create the world?

page: 7
10
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 2 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthEvolves
 
Because I have memories of being inbetween lives and the creator was beyond where I was at that time. Thats how I can say that. LOL




posted on May, 2 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthEvolves
 


What do you mean?
I don't quite get the question.

I stated my opinion above yours.
That's pretty much what it tells me.

If something is given from God there will be verification.
Could come any way, and be anything.
A person knows when the truth hits them.
I keep editing this post


I think that is how I see it, Evolution is perfection in motion, and to me all is God in the waaaaaaay bigger picture, so it is natural that evolution is "God" created.
I would agree with the original Question, that is how I believe God did it, but God didn't tell me that, I just kinda see it that way in my head.
edit on 2-5-2012 by Darkblade71 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2012 @ 02:07 AM
link   
Interesting comments. I tend to think that if Genesis is *literally* true then God has many liberal tendencies. He created a garden with naked vegetarians, right? Adam and Eve were never hung up, and never in a mood to exploit Nature or one another. In fact, Creationism is more liberal than evolution in many ways. It was the Nachash that actually desired to introduce shame in to the world through the tree of knowledge.

However, I do believe in an evolutionary process. That means that all must be understood in a multi-dimensional context. This is probably too un-American for most of you. Americans like their facts plain and simple. But, the world is no more obligated to give you simplistic truths than it is obligated to give you cheap Chinese goods.
edit on 3-5-2012 by EarthEvolves because: word change



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthEvolves
Interesting comments. I tend to think that if Genesis is *literally* true then God has many liberal tendencies. He created a garden with naked vegetarians, right? Adam and Eve were never hung up, and never in a mood to exploit Nature or one another. In fact, Creationism is more liberal than evolution in many ways. It was the Nachash that actually desired to introduce shame in to the world through the tree of knowledge.


What do you mean by liberal? Are you using it in the political sense, in the sense of being generous, or in the sense of allowing people to do whatever they want? To me, all 3 of those contradict a literal genesis account, because god was pretty strict with adam and eve, one mistake and they got the boot. Then there's the 10 commandments and everything else. I just don't see that version of god as being liberal in the least, as he condoned slavery and putting people to death over things like adultery and homosexuality. It reflects on society today as well because in general the most religious people (especially the literalists) out there are conservatives.
edit on 4-5-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 


I am on away status for a while. Let me just say that if we follow a literal interpretation then the Original Plan seems like it was humane socialism, not of the dictatorial variety but of a Utopian variety. There seems to be an aspiration in the human heart along those lines that pure Darwinian theory does not seem to explain.

Best of luck.

I hope you all miss me while I am away but I need to address gathering those Federal Reserve notes that enslave me, but that have been made necessary unfortunately.



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 08:56 PM
link   
To the OP

religion makes # up all the #ing time. Science evaluates the facts... They are worlds part...



posted on May, 4 2012 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthEvolves
 


I guess I'd feel the same way I'd feel if a potter told me they used a potting wheel and clay to form a new vase. X tool and process was used to create Y result. Rather plain and simple..but why not?


I dont get where people get so messed up on this issue except that they have an image of what God is to them that they think God has to live up to...and they wont let go of it to look at other possibilities of what God might actually or 'really' be...in his own right...seperate to their minds view of him. The only 'permenant' view I have of God is that there is one..and that the God there is, is sentient...These two are discovered/revealed personal truths I hold to...beyond that..everythings open to examination and study.

imx, God by defintion, as a sentience, isnt bound by my minds comprehension of him, nor by science nor religion....but then, to me, all these 'items' are just tools to me that aid me to disover the truth, they are not the truth or not the 'facts' in themselves.

So for me this only becomes an issue for people if a "direct manifestation only" belief, is held as as a primary belief system or when the same is held as a limitation imposed on God by us or one we subconsciously impose on ourselves so we dont get too overwhelmed.

Even then..in order to manifest directly..one still has to KNOW what one is manifesting - the what and how, and I assume, the why. I dont know any creative being that doesnt have some idea of why or "what for" too.
So in order to simply form it 'complete', you'd still need to know what 'it' is....so even there, evolution or a comprehension of the processes of creation using a tool like evolution would serve God - for his own self/wisdom/perfections sake.

If this is the case, then God..like the potter, being a sentience, has made a conscious choice to use a process rather than simply manifest a complete reality, and I say why not? Maybe in another dimension he used a different tool? Who's to say! It could be the case that evolution is just an 'editing' tool not a first order creative tool...the possibiities are endless.

Either way, by definition of the word God, " how" to bring a thing to form, is his choice and to me, to limit that choice to our human comprehensions of whats possible..is seriously flawed. The tool of evolution is simply one of many posibilities for the expression of Gods will, curiosity and creativity and I supose..it could be viewed as an expression of intended will or even, a desire to observe the process rather than simply ' have' a completed form available for study......maybe it expresses a desire to participate in the creation and to be a part of the enlivening of it.

We can build a chair from the particles of life and 'have a chair'...but the chair deosnt move talk or isnt 'alive' per say beyond its subatomic and atomic state.....so..maybe in creating sentiences, this his how God 'lives' in and around us...consciously and activly.. a participant in life rather than subjectively or aloofly examining it.

This also doesnt rule out MANY forms of creative processes all happening at once on/in the same point of time or space - say here ( the animal kingdom or plant kingdom) he used evolution..on another issue ( consciousness) he might choose a tool he already knew the result of or blended evolution with another perocess altogether.. ..maybe over there ( morality) he used evolution combined with another process to explore its limitations weaknesses and strengths etc....

Maybe religionists are true..when they say if only symbolically, that we are only 6 'days' old. It is written that a day is a thousand years to the lord..so what is a 'day' to God from his perspective?. So maybe we are 6000 yrs old...perhaps it is the case that we have only become conscius now for a reason..in asnese, we are awake before the dream has ended, alive before we are 'created'...we are here learning and watching the final day of creation..the day he crteates man and woman...'living' in the time period before God sleeps rather an as we assume we are - after it. Created - is a HUMAN word that implies a process..nor a singular event.


Who knows but God what the end result will be of 'us' if this is the case...maybe we are being given a chance to have input in that process...maybe not...but if Jesus is representative of the completed form of 'man' nd so anything to go by..I say KEWL! What better result than a loving firey spirit of life capeable of miraculous love and deeds..a being of great self sacrifice trust, wisdom and surity in God. Maybe that is how man will end up after God is done creating. Who knows!


Religous views aside though...no artist I know has only one bush or one colour of paint..or one type of canvas...let alone one idea of what they desire to paint or create or only one technique available TO create it..even in the strictest disciplines where action is limited to a small range, there is is room for diversity of thought, and expression. Nor do many artists have a full picture or idea of the outcome..only the hope of what they wish to re-create or express and the limitations of their own education fear and skills aquisitions.
God, by definition having no limit...is free to use whatever he chooses..sans our judgement of what he has already used or what we think he ought to.

This view speaks volumes to me about the possible nature of the creative mind of God..and his heart and hopes in the creation itself...and also of the many forms of creativity possible.

Or, and going out on a limb and being egocentric for a moment...and lets say we are this sentient Gods actual children/offspring....

Maybe rather than just being subjects of or to the evolutionary process, -as we are godlike yet infant and growing spiritual beings in human bioforms - perhaps God wishes US to learn or comprehend the processes of creating and manifestation itself?

God being God..omniscient, omnipresent etc...would by definition already understand the process orhave 'completed it' fully and perfectly.., his knoweldge of it is complete and full and perfect.....so he does not need to show himself how why or what for over and over again.......so, not being a flawed being or being narccissitic, why else might he choose evolution except as a teaching aid?

Perhaps he chooses to explain the ' how' of creating to anyone willing to learn and listen..not just the 'what' of it and evolution as scientific process but its fundemental nature. If evolution in this sence can be viewed as a representation of the begining, middle and end of his own mental creative process...he might simply be showing the 'why' of creating to his children, if only for their understanding of 'what for' ....a master class so to speak.

I dont know really...I supose..anythings possible


Since my spiritual sprout a few years ago...Ive been examining the question of Gods will for me' quite closely...so this ties into that, and not just personally..but on a cosmos wide window of possibility...a pathway to uncovering or discovering the 'purpose' of all matter and life stuff...its an exciting journey if I stay openminded,willing and dont invest in my own self derived outcomes or the outcomes of others. If I dont judge or decide what God is..for God..and let him show me instead.

I have meny friends that worship the sun..some worship the moon or mother nature as God...for me ..I want to know what bought them into being and placed them...just so...so this is my journey..as a calling..if its not others..I respect that...they arent wrong' for not believing it or walking the same path I do. So much bickering..so needlessly....we are all 'right' and all 'wrong' in too many ways to get cranky about it.


ymmv


Ro

( I use the word "him" to refer to god here a lot..but that is not to say I hold directly God even has a gender let alone is a male form..its just for ease of description and as evidence of a remnant of old conditioning that still persists)


edit on 4-5-2012 by Rosha because: editing



posted on May, 6 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthEvolves
reply to post by Barcs
 


I am on away status for a while. Let me just say that if we follow a literal interpretation then the Original Plan seems like it was humane socialism, not of the dictatorial variety but of a Utopian variety. There seems to be an aspiration in the human heart along those lines that pure Darwinian theory does not seem to explain.

Best of luck.

I hope you all miss me while I am away but I need to address gathering those Federal Reserve notes that enslave me, but that have been made necessary unfortunately.


Interesting idea. So you're saying he's liberal in the sense that he's not going to punish people, but let the people regulate their own punishments and their own society? Then what's the deal with hell? From a literalist perspective that is not liberal at all. I'm not sure I see the connection to evolution.

I guess you won't see this for a while, but good luck in your travels. Get that paper.





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join