It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

God and evolotion

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Well to thing that God dint create evolotion is a little smug, if there is a being that is so great i'm sure all the working of are world are at its power, and im sure he could make evolution, so everything fits nice and perfect for us. If we are here for a reason im sure its not to firgure out if god is real, Or it could be and when u firgure that out you die.




posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Okay. I'm going to go ahead and take a crack at this one.

Why is it that some people seem to believe that you cannot believe in god and evolution at the same time? Why do discussions on evolution consistently turn into battles on Christianity?

Here's what I believe -

Evolution exists. Sure, we have an awful lot of holes in our theory, but that comes with the subject matter. We are trying to find evidence from millions of years ago; chances are it just isn't there anymore. The cynic in me doesn't think we will ever find enough evidence to "prove" our theory. But that's part of science - theories are never proven, only disproven.

Especially if the evidence you're looking for is fossil evidence. In order for a fossil to be preserved for that long, the animal would have had to die in extreme conditions that don't support decomposing bacteria, or perhaps been covered in sediment so quickly that bacteria doesn't have time to decompose it. That doesn't happen often.

But what about molecular biology? If anything supports evolution, it's this feild. We can easily determine how closely related two species are based on their DNA, species that are still living today. By comparing similarities and differences, it's relatively easy to come up with phylogenic ("family") trees. There is real, scientific, mathematical evidence behind those things.

So I'm one of those quacks who think we came from apes???

No. I don't think we came from apes. I think we ARE an ape. Most closely related to chimpanzees, who we did NOT evolve from but with whom we share a COMMON ANCESTOR. We evolved from the same common ancestor as chimpanzees... and we know 96% of the genome of this common ancestor, because 96% of our genome is the same as that of chimpanzees.

So I believe in evolution.

And I believe in god, though not in the same sense most people believe in god. I consider myself a christian (though I guess I'm really not) because it was through christianity that I was introduced to the concept of god. But I don't believe the bible literally. I believe the bible is one of many ancient text meant to teach a culture "right" and "wrong". And I don't believe in god as the omnipotent being who created all.

For me, god is more intangible than that. When I think about god, the one thing I can't deny is the overwhelming feeling of comfort and love that I feel. To me, at this moment in my life, that feeling actually is god. It's more of an energy... and it surrounds us. All that's really left of my christian childhood is the lessons it taught me to be a constructive member of society, and the concept that "God Is Love".

Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. That's just my 2 cents.

>>Sorry User001... my post kinda doesn't address what the thread was originally about. And I don't think you're saying god and evolution can't be believed at the same time (in fact, you say much the opposite). I'm just addressing things that have come up in similar threads.

[edit on 2-11-2004 by Majickyl]



posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Evolution and the idea of "god" dont conflict. The theory of evolution and fundamentalist interpritation of the judeo/christian/muslim holy books do conflict however. The conflict isnt between Darwinists and the religious, its between Darwinist's and the religious fundamentalists.



posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majickyl
Okay. I'm going to go ahead and take a crack at this one.

Why is it that some people seem to believe that you cannot believe in god and evolution at the same time? Why do discussions on evolution consistently turn into battles on Christianity?



thats just about a perfect answer Majic


the rest is probably confusing..



posted on Nov, 2 2004 @ 05:05 PM
link   
I also believe a supreme being would have such a pattern of control and design. Evolution is the human version of how you'd create an automobile. You'd put it through an assembly line, it can't be built from the process of nothing.

I remember in my computer class we discussed inheritance, which I feel can be used here as well. Basically you wouldn't create every object (human, tree, animal) from scratch - no that'd be pointless. You'd create a class object (otherwords a master blueprint) and have everything below, inherit from that object. So for example a cookie cutter (this would be our class object or the blueprints if you will). Take that cutter and make some cookies, they all inherit the same properties as the cutter (class object), sure some might vary but your outcome is almost the same.

Your cookie cutter is the blueprint, the dough could be the chemical compounds and everything we're made of. Take a human shaped cookie cutter, start making some shapes and bam. Of course the process is ALOT more difficult then that. Thats how I tend to understand it, sorry if i lost some people.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 10:29 AM
link   



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by apw100
Evolution and the idea of "god" dont conflict. The theory of evolution and fundamentalist interpritation of the judeo/christian/muslim holy books do conflict however. The conflict isnt between Darwinists and the religious, its between Darwinist's and the religious fundamentalists.


with the slight correction thier is no such thing as a Darwinist that anyones aware of for the last say 120 years

a Darwinist would be someone that believes Darwin was 100% correct, which would put him only slightly ahead of fundamentalists in the bieng correct about how it all got here

correct Darwinist to Evolutionist and your spot on ^_^



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Let me take stab at this one


If it is okay to believe that god "invented" evolution... why is it such a leap to believe that evolution exists without a god?

The idea of evolution is that we all evolved from single cell organisms. This would mean god only created single celled organisms?

Does this mean that potentially a "creator" was around at one point in time, but left and stopped paying attention?

I think to believe in evolution and a creator is almost directly contradictory in nature. Its pretty much one of the basic premises for IDers.

If evolution exists, why is there a need for a creator?

If a creator exists, why does evolution happen?

You create your own paradox.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Here's one to chew on...

If a hypothetical doctor examined Adam and Eve...on day two of their existence...and he examined them...not knowing they were 'created' the day before...he'd probably say they were 20 something years old/mature, because of the development he observed, right?

Could it be the universe was 'created' the same way? With apparent age?

I don't know, but it's something to think about...?

OT



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:14 PM
link   
If you define "God" as a kind of supernatural, trans-dimensional entity encompassing everything and nothing throughout all of spacetime, then how can you separate it into a distinct entity, and how can this entity have any kind of need or motivation to do anything? Is God lonely? Must God create to exist? No? Then what is the point?

Anyway, the basic problem with any and all questions like this one is that there is a completely unwarranted assumption at the root of it that time begins at a distant point, moves at a steady rate from the past through the present and into the future, and ends at some distant point. There's no proof time works that way at all. Most current theoretical physics accepts that a flow of time is a convention not supported by research. So all the assumptions about "first causes" and "creations" really make no sense.

The concept of God is a useless paradox, and completely unnecessary to any equation, whether it has to do with "creation," or "evolution."



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I've heard this line of thinking before OT...

It fits right in with the whole theory that Dinosaur bones were created by the devil to shake someone's beliefs... or that the earth is really only 6000 years old...

This notion to me seems like a desperate attempt to rationalize one's faith against the scientific evidence presented.

The amazing thing about this type of theory, is that no matter what evidence is presented, the response could always be that the creator designed it that way. Thus, making the presentation of scientific facts inadmissable as evidence to counter the argument.

Instead of believing that a deity created the history at the time he created seem more complicated than if the history actually happened?

When studying science, usually the simple answer is the most correct.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
Here's one to chew on...

If a hypothetical doctor examined Adam and Eve...on day two of their existence...and he examined them...not knowing they were 'created' the day before...he'd probably say they were 20 something years old/mature, because of the development he observed, right?

Could it be the universe was 'created' the same way? With apparent age?

I don't know, but it's something to think about...?

OT


erm... i did

is your God the deceptive type? either gods playing a big practicle joke or

God hate smart people and doesnt want them into heaven (sounds like pol pot just without the shoot the people in glasses policy)

he buried dinosaur bones and made the earth look really old so smart people will do all these kind of tests and he changed all the results to make it look billions of years old he meddled with the experiment that show the speed of light evolution geology he meddled in algebra

basically he meddled in all science to give false results so people wouldnt belive and wouldnt get into heaven

he also made everything a bit shoddy, the human brains a big mess with bits shoved in anyold how and most of it counter-intuativley, its more a miracle we havnt fallen to the ground and our heads imploded from having conciousness then the fact we have conciousness

he gave us nipples for no reason, and a few vestigial organs, he gave us a level of locamotion thats basically falling over over long distances, random mutations, filled us with leftover dna that results in strange things like people growing horns and thick animal like coats of hair and other oddities

a big joker and a dodgy builder ....... what an interesting glimpse of a perfect creator


[edit on 11/11/08 by noobfun]



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by nj2day
I've heard this line of thinking before OT...

It fits right in with the whole theory that Dinosaur bones were created by the devil to shake someone's beliefs... or that the earth is really only 6000 years old...

This notion to me seems like a desperate attempt to rationalize one's faith against the scientific evidence presented.

The amazing thing about this type of theory, is that no matter what evidence is presented, the response could always be that the creator designed it that way. Thus, making the presentation of scientific facts inadmissable as evidence to counter the argument.

Instead of believing that a deity created the history at the time he created seem more complicated than if the history actually happened?

When studying science, usually the simple answer is the most correct.




Hey man, How are you?

I don't know how old the earth and universe is...

To me this is not a centrally important issue, but sure fun to marinate on...6000 yrs vs. 6 billion???

I try and views things as systems, more than isolated items...

Kinda like what are the implications of evolution? OT's just not ready to swallow we are animals living in a dog-eat-dog world, make up rightness through strength along the way... and gonna make some good fertilizer in the end...that's really depressing to me...

But again there are much more important issues of faith to me....good seeing your posts again.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by noobfun
 


Allthough, I guess hypothetically that would make god part of a conspiracy


he created history and archeological evidence to make the earth appear older? Sounds like a cover up to me


What's he/she/it hiding? Why must the evidence of a creation event be covered up in such an elaborate manner?

Why would a deity that wanted people to believe, create evidence overwhelmingly to the contrary?



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by noobfun
 



Hey noobfun...

Witty, you are!


Could it be the sin nature brought entropy to the universe?

Nibbles are a good thing though...remember he created women after men and as he did the universe, just EXPANDED them for our enjoyment!



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 


good to see you again too OT


I know and completely understand why one would find the implications of evolution depressing and disheartening.

However the cosmos could care less how we feel as individuals.

Mostly I've noticed there is something about the human mind that isn't quite right as far as truth seeking goes. Most would rather believe a comfortable lie than an uncomfortable truth.

I do like your position on looking at things as a system, instead of individual units... This type of thinking is the only way one can hope to even remotely understand the cosmos.



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by nj2day
 


maybe god doesnt really want people in heaven .... well lets face it, its perfect why would you want 144,000 people let in to make a mess of it

id just give em a few red herrings and let em run around and mess everything up then laugh when none of them make the mark and cant get in to ruin the greatest golf course ever made with wild swings and inapropriate shoes not to mention then crowding the bar so he has to wait in line



[edit on 11/11/08 by noobfun]



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
reply to post by noobfun
 



ould it be the sin nature brought entropy to the universe?

Nibbles are a good thing though...remember he created women after men and as he did the universe, just EXPANDED them for our enjoyment!


hey OT ^_^ ... natures a sin now? i must have missed that papal sanction

does that make men the prototype and women an improvment? that sure makes paul's lovely verses about how women should behave look stupid



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by noobfun

Originally posted by OldThinker
reply to post by noobfun
 



ould it be the sin nature brought entropy to the universe?

Nibbles are a good thing though...remember he created women after men and as he did the universe, just EXPANDED them for our enjoyment!


hey OT ^_^ ... natures a sin now? i must have missed that papal sanction

does that make men the prototype and women an improvment? that sure makes paul's lovely verses about how women should behave look stupid


Here's a little diddy on ther 'sin nature'... www.gotquestions.org...

Women, an improvement? Most definitely...been married 25 years to a great one...OT's philosophy is "I can be right...or happy...not both!" I'm happy



posted on Nov, 11 2008 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by noobfun
 


I would prefer to think of it as men = coke, women = new coke


anyway, along those lines, If sexuality is sinful, why did the creator make it the only way to reproduce?

OT: Could it be that entropy brought nature into existence?







 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join