Well, if God intended creation to freely evolve by itself according to certain principles, then it is not surprising at all that universe took so long to evolve to what it is now. It depends on what God wants out of creation. I don’t think you are in any position to judge ill of the creators intellect merely because you would prefer to create a non-evolving universe that merely moves according to your say so and your giant ego.
Ah, the old desparately-cover-for-absence-of-thought-by-throwing-insults-around argument.
How about that God doesn’t intervene. And has all the time in the world. And doesn’t dance to your tune.
The fossil record is clear in showing abrupt appearance, then stasis with limited variation within.
As God looks at His Creation, how long did it take vs when we look at it?
Exactamente. Well OK perhaps. But let’s not spoil the moment, as we’re hardly ever even in the same ballpark.
You’re still in a hurry! With all eternity at God’s disposal a few billion years are not really critical - unless you can explain why…
The element of chance!
But the Darwinian scheme implies that everything is senseless!
They make no sense under the assumption of nescient processes!
They make excellent sense if the Creator has figured things out and allowed for the element of chance within the framework of Design. A divine Engineer capable of creating this vast, immensely complex Universe doesn’t need to experiment…
Perhaps there is hope.Exactamente. Well OK perhaps. But let’s not spoil the moment, as we’re hardly ever even in the same ballpark.
That must have been a while back, can you give me the number of the post you quoted from so I can see the context? It sounds like I was just saying that there’s no mechanism in evolution which supplies a purpose.
That’s not something I’d ever argue - anyone and everyone can be wrong.
Your newspaper may be getting over excited in the way newspapers do. I’m currently listening to the CERN team’s technical conference (16:00-18:00 CET at webcast.web.cern.ch/webcast/), most of which is going straight over my head, but the team think there’s an anomaly in their results which they haven’t been able to find, and published their results to get advice from colleagues. Would be real exciting if a separate experiment confirms the results though, that’s how science moves forward after all.
As long as the universe is sufficiently big, old, orderly and complicated, everything can be explained as evolving without any intervention by God, the physical law is enough. The design of the law signals a creator, but only in a deist form, there’s nothing in evolution alone to hang our hat on in trying to find out more about God and any supposed purpose, we have to look elsewhere. Imho.
As evolution is completely blind with no mechanism to give purpose, in a sense it actively prevents us from being in any way preordained. So sure we’re here as a product of evolution but humans weren’t around that long ago and we could well become extinct or evolve into something else. Definite challenge to reconcile all this with traditional belief. One way is to inject some guiding and unnoticed interventions by God to tickle the process into producing us, but that puts Him in the role of tinkering. Another is that if God is truly God of all creation then any creature capable of relating to Him is perforce in God’s image, not just us.
A better question is why you think it is “long, long” and why you think it is a “delay”? Don’t you know that time is relative? This question becomes even more absurd once one considers that God is outside of time.
Why not? It may not make sense to you know but how do you know that it will never make sense. Do you think your dog or cat or pet understands your perfectly? Would a pig understand that first you must kill it then put its flesh in a smoke house to make it into bacon or ham?
Only to you. Piddly little brains cannot expect to comprehend the Great Nous. And the “piddly little brain” comment is not meant to be derogatory. We all have piddly little brains when we compare it to the Mind that thought up the universe.
Again, only according to your very limited understanding.
Very good point. I say this myself often. The most it points to is a Creator who creates in an orderly manner.
Only if you believe in strictly Darwinian evolution.
Or another way is that God designed everything and thus evolution is merely a process He chose. Which is why I have always maintained that once we factor God into the equation, there is no such thing as evolution. There is only design. It seems to be evolution only from our vantage point, but not from God’s.
If I am not mistaken, that is precisely what inocente is saying. If we stick to Darwinian evolution, then all we end up with is a deist God. Creation therefore is more than just Darwinian evolution.
Why is that?
Since your body has about a trillion cells of your own, but also contains about 10 trillion bacterial cells. And, bacteria predates mammals by a very long time… you could make the argument that humans evolved for the purpose of hosting bacteria. Teleological arguments are interesting. I believe they originated with Aristotle. The heartfelt debates in which neither side will ever agree, abortion and gay marriage are the hot ones presently, are the ones in which the basic premise is teleological. ie. What is the nature or essence of marriage?
Just because you know the miller experiment doesn’t mean everyone knows it… so yawn away… and I am not writing to your standard?.. didnt know I was in an English class on a forum. I need no class thanks, I have enough of them. My point is Evolution exists, it just doesn’t explain the origin of life… but you missed that I guess.