God versus Evolution

[Jet Grind]

I certainly care, there are repurcussions during life that I have to worry about. And if this is the only life I have, I certainly don't want to waste it.

 

[sackett]

Evolution & christianism

Way back in the 1920's, Sam Knight, Sr., one of the best geologists in the U.S., had a prepared lecture for Geology 101 at the University of Wyoming. He summarized the principal geological eras as they were defined in those days, comparing each one with a day in the Book of Genesis. With surprisingly little snipping and tucking, he showed how you could treat historical geology and Genesis together, finding parallels in the evolution of life and the biblical account. He ended the lecture (and put the topic to rest for the remainder of the course) by observing that "the bible says god made the world, but it doesn't say how he did it." It was all neatly done and non-controversial, and I don't see how any christianist or other believer could find fault with it -- unless they wilfully abdicate from common sense, and of course that's just what the fundoids do. Odd, the way these people have lost the elementary skill of using metaphor.

 

[Tricky]

Re: Evolution & christianism

Way back in the 1920's, Sam Knight, Sr., one of the best geologists in the U.S., had a prepared lecture for Geology 101 at the University of Wyoming. He summarized the principal geological eras as they were defined in those days, comparing each one with a day in the Book of Genesis. With surprisingly little snipping and tucking, he showed how you could treat historical geology and Genesis together, finding parallels in the evolution of life and the biblical account. He ended the lecture (and put the topic to rest for the remainder of the course) by observing that "the bible says god made the world, but it doesn't say how he did it." It was all neatly done and non-controversial, and I don't see how any christianist or other believer could find fault with it -- unless they wilfully abdicate from common sense, and of course that's just what the fundoids do. Odd, the way these people have lost the elementary skill of using metaphor.

I'm sure that was done to be palatable to the beginners in geology. My geology 101 professor basically said that learning the history of the earth should not damage anyone's faith. But even in the 1920s, there is simply no way that the biblical creation stories in Genesis (there are two) can truly be reconciled with actual earth history. The obvious problem is that they got the order all wrong. Still, I support anything which opens a peephole in a closed mind so that some knowledge may seep in.

 

[Dymanic]

Originally posted by Iacchus

Or, maybe you're just too lazy to put it in your own words.

This from someone who obviously hasn't made the effort to learn even the most rudimentary principles of evolutionary theory. If you really wanted answers to your questions (or even if you only wanted to hold up your end of an intelligent debate on the topic) wouldn't that be a reasonable first step?

 

[Mercutio]

This is based upon discussions I've had on another forum.

anything you could link? I'd like to see whether the person is credible, or as Tricky suggests, a straw figure.

Yes, but if our stay here is only temporary, and there are no repercussions afterwards, who cares?

Why is it only non-materialists claim this as the materialist view? Who cares? Hmmm...you're right, now that I think about it. Since I'll be dead, I have no reason to care whether my children survive and prosper....what do I care about grandchildren? Friends? pah! I'll be dead, I don't need to care about them!

As both Tricky and Jet Grind said, just above...we only get one world. We really have to take care of it.

 

[Iacchus]

anything you could link? I'd like to see whether the person is credible, or as Tricky suggests, a straw figure.

Somewhere on this thread I believe, A Flaw in the Theory of Natural Selection? ...

If it's not there I'll have to take a look later ...

Why is it only non-materialists claim this as the materialist view? Who cares? Hmmm...you're right, now that I think about it. Since I'll be dead, I have no reason to care whether my children survive and prosper....what do I care about grandchildren? Friends? pah! I'll be dead, I don't need to care about them!

Yes, why should people care in spite of all of this? It's almost like it's built in. Yet why should it be?

As both Tricky and Jet Grind said, just above...we only get one world. We really have to take care of it.

The fact of the matter is we aren't.

 

[Iacchus]

This from someone who obviously hasn't made the effort to learn even the most rudimentary principles of evolutionary theory. If you really wanted answers to your questions (or even if you only wanted to hold up your end of an intelligent debate on the topic) wouldn't that be a reasonable first step?

And yet the only distinction that I really have to make is that we don't belong here.

 

[Iacchus]

I think lacchus must be referring to the straw-man materialists they prop up in his philosophy circles. I certainly have never heard any evolutionist espousing these sentiments. Oh, yeah, there are some fatalistic people everywhere, but I doubt that they are more populous in the materialist camp.

Yet the whole thing sounds very plausible if, in fact I was a materialist.

Personally, I'm all in favor of continuation of the species Homo sapiens and I try to adjust my beliefs and lifestyle to promote this.

Feelings? You actually have feelings over the matter?

And one of those things about the physical world is that it is finite. We need to stop stressing the ecosystem with so many people. I do not see spiritual people addressing this issue. I see some spiritual people (like Catholics) doing everything they can to make the situation worse. I suppose you could say this "feeds the soul," but how is this going to feed the real, viceral hunger that causes so many humans to live in misery?

And I see rampant consumerism all over the place.

 

[Iacchus]

I certainly care, there are repurcussions during life that I have to worry about. And if this is the only life I have, I certainly don't want to waste it.

Why all the sappy sentimentalism? When you're dead your dead. Or, maybe you were never alive in the first place?

 

[Tricky]

Somewhere on this thread I believe, A Flaw in the Theory of Natural Selection? ...

If it's not there I'll have to take a look later ...

Well, I won't deny there are selfish idiots in every camp, including evolutionists. I don't think many of them are here on these boards.

Yes, why should people care in spite of all of this? It's almost like it's built in. Yet why should it be?

Because evolution selects for creatures that protect their kind. It should be very obvious that things which protect their kind will continue, so yes, caring is hardwired into us by evolution.

The fact of the matter is we aren't.

And the fact of the matter is that the world has a whole lot more spiritual people than non-spiritual people. I think they deserve the lion's share of the blame for what we are doing to our earth.

 

[Tricky]

Yet the whole thing sounds very plausible if, in fact I was a materialist.

Sadly, though, you are not empathic with materialists. You cannot say what you would do "if you were a materialist" because you do not seem to know how materialists feel.

Feelings? You actually have feelings over the matter?

LOL. Certainly your conception of materialists is not that they are emotionless zombies? I hope your comment was tongue-in-cheek, but I didn't see any smilies.

And I see rampant consumerism all over the place.

And you attribute that all to materialists? Have you noticed any rich spiritual people? Turn on any religious television channel to see how many spiritual people engage in rampant consumerism.

 

[gentlehorse]

LOL. Certainly your conception of materialists is not that they are emotionless zombies?

Of course you are, zombieboy.

Turn on any religious television channel to see how many spiritual people engage in rampant consumerism.

No true spiritual people engage in rampant consumerism.

*runs away*








Sorry. I don't know what came over me. I couldn't help myself. Sometimes I just have to indulge.

 

[Chanileslie]

Interesting the attempt to link humans recieving souls from god and the advent of agriculture. Does this mean leafcutter ants have souls?

Yes, yes they do. As much of a soul as you or I or anyone or thing else has.

 

[Chanileslie]

The only problem I have is that evolution addresses the natural world, which is fine but, it doesn't address anything spiritual? ... and in effect promotes materialism, over-consumption, and basically the complete demise of this planet.

Whereas if we understood we were spiritual beings -- i.e., from whence we came and whence we go -- maybe we would be less inclined to become so self-engrossed, and actually give things back to the planet.

No it doesn't. Evolution is a process and nothing more. Anything else you put into it is your own bias. Actually from my veiw point, understanding evolution allows us to understand how the world works and gives us better tools to learn to not step on the toes of other species and the environment.

I think your argument is interesting since the whole concept of a soul is something that was invented just so humans could consider themselves better than the rest of the world, and has been used many times since its inception as a reason to abuse and take advantage of animals and plant life. The whole idea, "God made this all for us...." Blah!

 

[Jet Grind]

Originally posted by lacchus
Why all the sappy sentimentalism?

I will use your own words to answer this question

When you're dead your dead.

That's why.

Originally posted by lacchus
Or, maybe you were never alive in the first place?

I have no idea what this means.

 

[Chanileslie]

This is based upon discussions I've had on another forum.


Yes, but if our stay here is only temporary, and there are no repercussions afterwards, who cares?

This is one of the most bogus things religious people have come up with to date: Oh, you have no morals without god. It is absurd.

Abuse of the planet happens through ignorance and selfishness, both of which are fostered in the chrisitan dogma. Me, me, me. "I do good because I want god to give me a reward. I don't learn because god wants me to have faith. Oh, what would god think?" Instead, think of what is right. What is proper. What is the best for everyone involved including the future generations of this planet. Do good because it is the right thing to do to help others and the planet. Do the right thing because it is the best thing for no other alturistic reasons than just because it is the right thing to care for our planet, for ourselves and for the other species that inhabit this planet.

 

[epepke]

The only problem I have is that evolution addresses the natural world, which is fine but, it doesn't address anything spiritual? ... and in effect promotes materialism, over-consumption, and basically the complete demise of this planet.

By that logic, Campbell's Condensed Soup doesn't address anything spiritual, and in effect, promotes materialism, over-consumption, and basically the complete demise of this planet.

Automobile timing lights also don't address anything spiritual, and in effect, promote materialism, over-consumption, and basically the complete demise of this planet.

Greibach Normal Form for context-free grammars doesn't address anything spiritual, and in effect, promotes materialism, over-consumption, and basically the complete demise of this planet.

The color of white paper doesn't address anything spiritual, and in effect, promotes materialism, over-consumption, and basically the complete demise of this planet.

The list goes on and on.

 

[Iacchus]

This is one of the most bogus things religious people have come up with to date: Oh, you have no morals without god. It is absurd.

And yet that would also coincide with the fact that He exists now wouldn't it?

Abuse of the planet happens through ignorance and selfishness, both of which are fostered in the chrisitan dogma. Me, me, me. "I do good because I want god to give me a reward. I don't learn because god wants me to have faith. Oh, what would god think?" Instead, think of what is right. What is proper. What is the best for everyone involved including the future generations of this planet. Do good because it is the right thing to do to help others and the planet. Do the right thing because it is the best thing for no other alturistic reasons than just because it is the right thing to care for our planet, for ourselves and for the other species that inhabit this planet.

Like I said, if our stay here is only temporary, and there are no repercussions afterwards, who cares?

 

[Iacchus]

By that logic, Campbell's Condensed Soup doesn't address anything spiritual, and in effect, promotes materialism, over-consumption, and basically the complete demise of this planet.

Automobile timing lights also don't address anything spiritual, and in effect, promote materialism, over-consumption, and basically the complete demise of this planet.

Greibach Normal Form for context-free grammars doesn't address anything spiritual, and in effect, promotes materialism, over-consumption, and basically the complete demise of this planet.

The color of white paper doesn't address anything spiritual, and in effect, promotes materialism, over-consumption, and basically the complete demise of this planet.

The list goes on and on.

Yes, all this stuff is artificial and man-made, and ultimately will. You betcha!

 

[El Greco]

And yet that would also coincide with the fact that He exists now wouldn't it?

The fact that you are allowed to post such completely irrelevant answers without repercussion, is by itself a proof that God doesn't exist.