Evolution/creationism--supported by scripture

[Godhead]

I had this in a different part of the forums; but I decided to move it here instead, since it has to do with sacred scripture.

I don’t know why science says that the bible is not scientific fact. According to science, all life came from the water. In Genesis, it the proof is right there—where it says, And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Scientists in all their observations fail to see any connection between their claim and what is written in the bible. As you know, the Spirit is a life giving spirit of which I will demonstrate clearly.

[Mod edit: **Read the rest here in Post #11]

 

[Godhead]

A question can be raised—why wasn’t man given four arms and ten legs. Out of necessity to survival the Spirit chose symmetrical simplicity, which is evident in all life forms—they are symmetrically simple. This is perhaps one principal that Spirit-driven life acquired. And it is evident that the Spirit that moves upon all life is able to do some things in one kingdom that it cannot do in another kingdom. For example, in the reptile kingdom, the spirit found that the best answer was to make them cold-blooded. In the insect kingdom the spirit found that it could create animals with multiple legs; whereas in the mammal kingdom it was not necessary to create an animal with more than four legs. The Spirit is one that raises questions and solves the problems with the best and most simplistic answers, hence, symmetrical-simplicity.

To put it in perspective, the spirit of God is the one that formed man out of the dust from the ground—A truth spoken in regards that man is organic and all his flesh came from the organics of the earth. And the Gods spoke, let us form man in our image and after are likeness. Hence, in the image of God, man was given a mind that could handle truth; and with truth is reason and creativity, amongst other things such as; love, however love was something granted by the Spirit which evident in all of creation; For example, a mother giving milk to her young.

As the Spirit of God raised man up to have dominion over all the earth—that Spirit gave man the task of answering that first question—what or Why? And this is evident in man’s reasoning and creativity, man is always pondering this question. Evolution is in fact occurring, not only in the flesh but in thought. If life is driven by Spirit and the Spirit is one that raises questions then in some significant level—the Spirit of man, which is the same life-giving spirit is passing answers in mutable DNA.

 

[Godhead]

If man is made in the image of God, after their likeness then the ultimate form is already here—you are wearing it. Perhaps, DNA is still being moved by the spirit, most definitely, in order to ‘tweak’ man in some respects, such as; a longer lifespan or whatever the perfect being would require, in all of man’s perfection. Jesus is the example of perfection. In his Spirit, which is God the Father, he was able to perform miracles, meaning that the perfect human has power to transcend reality and control it—that is the inevitable course of man as his imagination dictates—to rise above reality and control it. If it is within man’s imagination and resembles a perfect image of truth then the Spirit which moves upon the DNA and mutates it—the Spirit will manifest it through the flesh, however, it is not man that is capable of the power to perform miracles but it is the Spirit which is performing the miracles through man—that life-giving spirit.

Immortality is the ultimate goal of evolution because even though it is man’s purpose to possess the love of God, first and foremost, it is also his purpose or mindfulness to live forever; of which is the purpose of life is to live and to love to live. It is the spirit to raise the questions in man as it manifests itself through man. Like saying, Adam, what do you want out of life. Adam replies, to live long and prosper. And the Spirit says, No Adam—that is not your want but the Spirit of God talking through you and manifesting it’s goals. Why? Because it is given to all-living things to carry the task of life; and that is to answer the question—what or Why? Eternal life is just one of the answers that the Spirit of life came across and with that answer, it manifests itself to all living things because survival is upon all of life’s minds; but the severe depths of survival have been placed within the human breast, especially.

Now I turn my words to opposition—that it is conclusive to reality. As all opposites exist, Love and hate, attraction and repulsion, fear and comfort, good and evil, God and Satan. Satan was once thought to be an antediluvian or fossil of our energy; but that is far from fact since we are able to establish God’s possessions: Love, attraction, comfort, good, etc…And we can establish Satan’s possessions: hate, repulsion, fear, evil, etc…

However it is one Spirit that moves all. The Spirit of life is one that raises questions; but without opposition that first question—what or Why?__would have never been raised. To put it in perspective, life and the world came into opposition; therefore we can separate God’s possession which is life; and we can separate Satan’s possession which is the world, hence, Satan is the ruler of this world or the Spirit of This World is Satan. Now, a spirit of wickedness can be seen more clearly. Does Satan exist in form, perhaps, as an angel (as you know angels created the world) but it is evident that is Spirit is manifested through the possession of death; of which is the ultimate evil and it’s summation. However, the life-giving Spirit is one that works on all things; finding it necessary that opposition may be the significant part of existence and what in fact, allows the world to evolve. Without opposition there would be no questions raised.

 

[Godhead]

To put it in perspective, And Satan stood upon the Lord’s right hand and said, I will be the Lord’s adversary. Opposition becomes true friendship; as without opposites there is no progression. Satan provides the world and the life-giving Spirit provides the questions and the answers. Therefore, enemies are reconciled to the infernal nature of life—that is, without opposition there is no progression.

To move onto the evolution of thought, one must consider that evil becomes necessary to the progression of the answers we seek. Without tales of Chivalrous knights slaying evil dragons, Virtue would become an insignificant portion to existence. Therefore, evil becomes a necessity to thought. Some atheists or even God-haters claim that the God the bible is an evil God. For example, God destroys and turns Sodom into salt. An evil act in deed, but in a literary sense, a necessary evil because without the experimental in the philosophical world, one could do no other than repeat the same dull round again. Evil then becomes necessary to literature; so that out of evil, good arises in it’s midst. Take thou Shalt not kill, for example. The word kill is associated with evil; but becomes necessary to establish a higher good. That’s not to say that evil that manifests it physically is indeed unnecessary; however, to establish Higher laws or Virtues, evil becomes necessary in the literature; in order for God or Good to confront Satan or evil, so that such things as perfection in Love and Virtue can be established and provided for all of mankind.

God is already perfect but man is not. Therefore it becomes necessary for God to commit seemingly evil acts in order for man to progress to the perfection of God. Hence, Sodom was turned into salt so that in literature, a lesson may be taught; in order for man to turn away from sin. God is not stupid, God knows that we all have our weaknesses and that in our weaknesses, we fall to sin. God is not a punisher but a teacher and his judgments are placed upon the earth by word of mouth and action, according to his plan for all of us. Hence, God revealed himself as a forgiving God, in his forgiveness of sins; but he is not blind to justice. The Spirit is a life-giving spirit and that is an image of truth. The Spirit already has the ultimate questions solved; but simply gives life little by little of what is meant to be because eternity is in love with the productions of time. In this image, of life-giving—that is what the Spirit of God is trying to establish—that life should be giving to not just friend but neighbor; hence, love thy neighbor. God is not blind to justice. If you are not a life-giving spirit then you are a life-taking spirit. If you do not take what God provides for then you have enmity with life; and the weeds are pulled out and burned in the fire because they are not made in the image of life but in the image of death—that is why if you do not eat the flesh and drink the blood of the son of man, you have no life in you; but to further the point, the heavens have already been established. God knows before you do; of what life is all about, so it is just not simply eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Jesus Christ; but it is also living by the living water that pours through his mouth in word. Remember, The Holy Spirit is a life-giving spirit; and what one of the triune’s God has the other two have it; however, it is the Holy Spirit that is thee life-giving spirit. Therefore, it is said, if someone raises a word against the son of man he shall be forgiven; and if someone raises a word against the Father he shall be forgiven; but if someone raises a word against the Holy Spirit, he shall not be forgiven in heaven or on earth because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of life. If you hate life then you love death. The Holy Spirit has nothing to do with death. It is all life. If you are so wicked that you hate life to the furthest degree then you are in opposition to life and in truth you are in opposition to the Holy Spirit, which is the life-giving Spirit.

 

[Godhead]

Science is foolish because they, the scientists, do not speculate that a Spirit exists because they have no proof; but there so stupid that they do not see that it is Spirit of what drives them to question the world. God without science leads its followers into a pit because without God or that which is called a higher power or a higher value—the scientists fall into a bottomless pit. The blind lead the blind into pits. The scientist’s whole purpose in life is to peel the layers of reality or existence like an onion. But sooner or later they will find out that existence is infinitesimal in nature because it was created by an infinitesimal God. One who reflects his power through scientific observation.

Man, most men, place the hard questions upon God, in reflection; and the hardest question is Why? It may be interesting to find out if even God knows the answer to this question because if God always existed then there would be no reason that this question could be answered by even God. How would God know Why? If God always existed. I think Jesus sums it up perfectly, the man old in days would not hesitate to ask an infant seven days old what is the place in life and that man shall live! The old man being God, himself! Perhaps the image of a child reflects God perfectly because being an always-God, God becomes a child in the sight of that wonderful question, Why?

In the beginning, the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters creating a single cell organism; and from that organism sprung all of life through question and observation derived from the organisms senses; so that life may have life and have it more abundantly.

 

[Deacon_Joseph]

All scientists are not atheists. God built the universe with laws, I think, because He knew mankind would be interested in how things work. Eienstein once said, “God doesn’t play dice with the universe”. As far as Evolution theory goes, most Catholics don’t have a problem with the biological nature of Evolution, as long as you know that God had a hand in the creation of things from the beginning to the end. Creation is not random. If a person is atheist, than to be consistent with his beliefs, he or she must also believe that nothing has a purpose and everything is random.

You pose an interesting question, that if God always existed how would even God know. A interesting theological and philosophical question. Not sure how to answer that one, but I like the question, it makes me think!

 

[Seamus_Sully]

Creation is Biblical!

Evolotion is not!

Evolution does not teach one model!

If they ever come to one model and it includes God, then the conversation can truly start.

Start!

Scientists refuse to use all of the humans ability to reason to solve the problem.

They will only use math and science. That leaves a great deal of human ability to reason out.

I have never said that to a scientist before. I do not know how they will respond.

Good luck and may God bless!!!

 

[Orogeny]

Creation is Biblical!

Evolotion is not!

Correct! Evolution is science!

Evolution does not teach one model!

Correct! Evolution is a process, not a teacher!

If they ever come to one model and it includes God, then the conversation can truly start.

If “they” come up with a model that includes God, it won’t be a scientific model.

Conversation with whom?

Scientists refuse to use all of the humans ability to reason to solve the problem.

They will only use math and science. That leaves a great deal of human ability to reason out.

You are making the fundamental mistake of ASSUMING that all scientists are athiests. We are not. You are not holier than I am regardless of your literalist position. The scientific evidence for evolution is overwhelming to the point that evolution is clearly a fact.

I have never said that to a scientist before. I do not know how they will respond.

Feel better now?

Peace

Tim

 

[Seamus_Sully]

If “they” come up with a model that includes God, it won’t be a scientific model.

But it could still be rational. We had better use more than just math and science.

To converse with whom ever wishes to converse.

 

[Seamus_Sully]

You are making the fundamental mistake of ASSUMING that all scientists are athiests. We are not. You are not holier than I am regardless of your literalist position. The scientific evidence for evolution is overwhelming to the point that evolution is clearly a fact.

You are wrong.

I know too many scientists.

I just thought up the questions today.

My own family members are scientists.

I work with many scientists.

 

[Seamus_Sully]

The scientific evidence for evolution is overwhelming to the point that evolution is clearly a fact.

Again, I know many scientists.

They are overwhelmed.

They want to include God into the equation, at least some.

There are others who think evolution is a lie.

Not all scientist believe in evoltion.

We are talking scientific belief.

Very few individuals can study all of the different areas that one needs to study in the areas of evolution.

Scientist must BELIEVE each other.

There is a lot of belief in the areas of science.

Let me ask you, have you studied all of the areas involved?

Do you believe the research of the many areas involved?

How did the planets come into existence?

From what I have read, there is no agreement.

Have you even seen all of the planets?

Have you spent the time following their movements or do you believe that there are eight, nine or ten?

Do you believe or know from research that they go around the sun?

The list is endless.

The scientists might be correct.

The scientists might be close to the correct answers.

But if I have not done the research, and did a complete job, then I believe the ones who have.

There is nothing wrong with that.

But it is still belief.

There isn’t agreement for the heating up of the earth.

Is it the sun itself?

Is it coming from under the seas?

Are we passing through a area of the universe that is causing the warming?

From where did the laws that govern the physical world come?

When did they evolve?

Are there laws that govern the universe?

How did the laws that govern life evolve?

When did they evolve?

Let us use literature: From whom did they evolve?

Who, what, how, when, and WHY?

Many doctors of science in the universities say, DON’T ask why.

Also, DON’T ask WHO?

Why not?

 

[Orogeny]

But it could still be rational. We had better use more than just math and science.

To converse with whom ever wishes to converse.

You seem to be missing the point. Science is the study of nature. God is outside nature (supernatural). Science cannot address the supernatural; therefore, science cannot address God. If God is used as part of a theory, you now have a supernatural mechanism which can’t be explained naturally.

There is nothing irrational about science nor is there any requirement that a scientist not believe that God exists and is an integral part of nature. HOWEVER, using God as part of a scientific theory IS irrational.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

You are wrong.

I know too many scientists.

I just thought up the questions today.

My own family members are scientists.

I work with many scientists.

Good. Then perhaps you can ask them why we don’t use God as the scientific explanation for the appearance of a rainbow, regardless of what is written in Genesis.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

Again, I know many scientists.

They are overwhelmed.

They want to include God into the equation, at least some.

There are others who think evolution is a lie.

Not all scientist believe in evoltion.

What kind of scientists are your friends who think that evolution is a lie? Perhaps they would like to join in the fun here discussing the topic?

Let me ask you, have you studied all of the areas involved?

No.

Do you believe the research of the many areas involved?

Yes.

How did the planets come into existence?

From what I have read, there is no agreement.

The planets do exist, though, don’t they? Just like evolution. Evolution is a fact, planets are factual. How does evolution occur, how did planets form? Theories.

The scientists might be correct.

The scientists might be close to the correct answers.

But if I have not done the research, and did a complete job, then I believe the ones who have.

Then you would undoubtedly accept evolution because the scientists who have done the research say that it is a fact and those who deny evolution really haven’t.

Who, what, how, when, and WHY?

Many doctors of science in the universities say, DON’T ask why.

Also, DON’T ask WHO?

Why not?

You are asking science to do something that it can’t do. You also seem to be suggesting that science must have ALL the truths. Science is only concerned about explaining nature. Theology is the study that can answer the supernatural questions. Just as I wouldn’t expect theology to give me the scientific explanation of the existence of the Hawaiian Islands, I wouldn’t expect science to tell me why the universe was created or who created it.

Peace

Tim

 

[Seamus_Sully]

What actual research have you done in these areas?

 

[Orogeny]

What actual research have you done in these areas?

I’m a geologist.

Peace

Tim

 

[Seamus_Sully]

I am not trying to set limits on science!

Concerning scientific belief, I believe in the geological column.

I believe in the tectonic plates.

I do not know those as a geologist.

I am overjoyed to believe.

I believe in electrons and subatomic particles.

I am overjoyed to believe in them.

I have seen experiments that deal with electrons.

I believed the profs when they explained what I was experiencing.

This is good, but it is scientific believe for me, not them.

Evolution is a belief, too.

However, many physical scientists do not believe in evolution.

It is not a fact.

Most text books that explain evolution leave out God.

If there is a God and if God was involved, then that should be addressed.

So, too, with the origins of the universe(s).

Human reason has a right to include all of its tools, not just math and science.

If philosophers know that being is contingent, then why not blend that knowledge with science?

 

[Orogeny]

However, many physical scientists do not believe in evolution.

It is not a fact.

Very few percentage wise “don’t believe in evolution”, and they are wrong. It is a fact.

Most text books that explain evolution leave out God.

That’s because those textbooks are science textbooks.

If there is a God and if God was involved, then that should be addressed.

In a theology or metaphysics class, yes. In a biology class, no.

Human reason has a right to include all of its tools, not just math and science.

Agreed. However, I will argue against teaching theology in science class just as I would argue against teaching sentence structure during physics class.

If philosophers know that being is contingent, then why not blend that knowledge with science?

No problem with that, but it must be done in a different setting. Science is hard enough. Adding non-scientific topics would only make it harder.

Would you oppose teaching art appreciation during chemistry class? How about the binomial theorum during world history class?

Peace

Tim

 

[Seamus_Sully]

I am not sure, but I think that many scientists are perplexed by the issues of evolution.

I am not sure, but I think that many scientists are complacent about evolution.

I am not sure, but I think that many, if not most, scientists have never researched the topic.

Therefore if they accept evolution, for them, it is a belief. The obverse it also true.

I am not sure, but I think many scientists believe or do not believe in evolution.

I am not sure, but I think that it is not a fact.

Concerning those scientists that have investigated the issue, I would love to know the actual percentage that does not accept the model of evolution.

I do not have the time or money to do the research.

From the books that I have read on the topic, the topic is open for debate.

I have read many sides of the debate. It is has many sides and not just two.

Again, it is open to debate.

It is not a fact.

Would you oppose teaching art appreciation during chemistry class? YES!

How about the binomial theorem during world history class? NO! (I am sorry but I do not know how to quote from other posts.) The history of math, science and medicine should be taught in world histroy classes.

However, in a theology or philosophy class, science and all fields are discussed. All fields come up in those classes. It is wide open. They make use of those classes. This is true of a good history class.

In my judgment, science should use philosophy. And when they debate the origins of the universe and evolution, science should include philosophy. It is a most helpful too.