Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true

[Techno2000]

Edgar:

Wozza:

If you have any other proposals than evolution (apart from the literal reading of Genesis which I mentioned earlier) then bring them to the table. But as I also said, evolution and God are not mutually incompatible. Except if you’re a fundamentalist, in whicb case you can take your argument to your fellow Catholics

I favour a progressive creation model - evidenced by all those gaps in the fossil record - that describes a overall evolution that unfolded over millions-billions of years. But it’s not scientific, as it requires regular divine interventions. In effect, it’s a “God of the gaps” theory, writ large.

Regular divine interventions as opposed to what? I assume you would agree that God could have produced us in any way He chose. And that the evolutionary process could be the one He chose. Do we agree that that is a possibility?

Why would he use evolution when the Bible says he can create thing like fish,bread and wine in an instance, along with bringing the dead back to life.

 

[Edgar]

Why this subject deserves so many threads year after year points to an advertising program

As for me, a crazy, fundamentalist, creationist cult is paying me $1 for every anti-evolution post. That’s the only reason I’m here.

 

[Techno2000]

Yes, that would follow.

All you gotta do is use the word “Gradual” and everything will be ok.

 

[Edgar]

It’s Catholics who start these threads. Some of you seem obsessed with it. Check the posting history of some of the usual suspects and there’s hardly any other threads they post on. Your own recent history is a good example.

Getting $1/post is the most lucrative project I’ve ever been involved in.

Incidentally, I think it’s admirable that you persevere on this thread, what with being an atheist on a Catholic site and being further outnumbered by evo-doubters. Being a lone voice on a thread can get tiresome.

 

[Edgar]

All you gotta do is use the word “Gradual” and everything will be ok

Throw in billions of years and just about anything seems possible. It’s like magic.

 

[edwest]

But what if I need to eat right now?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Why would he use evolution when the Bible says he can create thing like fish,bread and wine in an instance, along with bringing the dead back to life.

Why wouldn’t He?

Your argument is equally unprovable.

If God chose to create us instantaneously, great.
If God chose to create us gradually, great.

The ability to create instantly does not instill a requirement to create instantly. It is equally probable that He saw merit in gradual creation as that He saw merit in instantaneous creation. Neither position is demanded by God’s abilities.

 

[Techno2000]

But what if I need to eat right now?

Don’t worry, environmental climate change always works slowly, and gradually… in perfect harmony with random mutations to always produce the best outcome.

 

[edwest]

I was afraid you’d say that.

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

Why would he use evolution when the Bible says he can create thing like fish,bread and wine in an instance, along with bringing the dead back to life.

Why wouldn’t He?

Your argument is equally unprovable.

If God chose to create us instantaneously, great.
If God chose to create us gradually, great.

The ability to create instantly does not instill a requirement to create instantly. It is equally probable that He saw merit in gradual creation as that He saw merit in instantaneous creation. Neither position is demanded by God’s abilities.

True, but to me the scale tips in favor of instantaneously, because nothing in the Bible even hints of gradualism.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

True, but to me the scale tips in favor of instantaneously, because nothing in the Bible even hints of gradualism.

Why should it?

The Bible is not a treatise on the mechanics of creation, it is a narrative on the nature of God’s relationship with us. There is no reason to include the literal mechanics of creation because they are inconsequential to the question.

Your argument is akin to saying that you do not believe in pumpkin pie because your cookbook of breakfast dishes doesn’t include a recipe.

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

True, but to me the scale tips in favor of instantaneously, because nothing in the Bible even hints of gradualism.

Why should it?

The Bible is not a treatise on the mechanics of creation, it is a narrative on the nature of God’s relationship with us. There is no reason to include the literal mechanics of creation because they are inconsequential to the question.

Your argument is akin to saying that you do not believe in pumpkin pie because your cookbook of breakfast dishes doesn’t include a recipe.

Why would God leave us in the dark about him creating us from bacteria? Was he ashamed that this was only way he could create Man?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Why would God leave us in the dark about him creating us from bacteria? Was he ashamed that this was only way he could create Man?

Why would He tell us that?

What purpose does it serve in terms of our salvation and His relationship with us? The Biblical account has Him creating us out of dust. I see no difference in terms of the quality of our substrate between the gradual development of a bacterial base, and the instant development of a mineral base.

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

Why would God leave us in the dark about him creating us from bacteria? Was he ashamed that this was only way he could create Man?

Why would He tell us that?

What purpose does it serve in terms of our salvation and His relationship with us? The Biblical account has Him creating us out of dust. I see no difference in terms of the quality of our substrate between the gradual development of a bacterial base, and the instant development of a mineral base.

So, you don’t see the difference between something that was handcrafted, and something that just left to survival of the fittest?

PS survival of the fittest is a contradiction of the ways of God when it comes to treating other people.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

So, you don’t see the difference between something that was handcrafted, and something that just left to survival of the fittest?

PS survival of the fittest is a contradiction of the ways of God when it comes to treating other people.

You are creating a false dichotomy. There is nothing saying that the evolutionary approach is any less hand-crafted than the instantaneous approach. The only difference is the medium the artist chose to employ.

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

So, you don’t see the difference between something that was handcrafted, and something that just left to survival of the fittest?

PS survival of the fittest is a contradiction of the ways of God when it comes to treating other people.

You are creating a false dichotomy. There is nothing saying that the evolutionary approach is any less hand-crafted than the instantaneous approach. The only difference is the medium the artist chose to employ.

Yeah…only that one approach took the artist 4 billion years to do…other than that, I see no difference. :crazy_face:

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Yeah…only that one approach took the artist 4 billion years to do…other than that I see no difference. :crazy_face:

4 Billion years is inconsequential to someone outside of time. 4 billion years has as little meaning as a millisecond to God. We compare it to a human lifespan and so it seems ridiculously large, but ultimately, from God’s perspective, both measures of time are infinity small.

God is eternal, time has no meaning to Him. Whether we were created in an instant, or over 4, or 10, or 1 million-billion years, it has the same impact on God. None whatsoever.

You are imposing the limitations and concerns of yourself, who is governed by time, on God, who is not. Time has meaning to us because our time, at least our time in this life, is finite. God has no such limitation, and so such concerns are inconsequential to Him.

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

Yeah…only that one approach took the artist 4 billion years to do…other than that I see no difference. :crazy_face:

4 Billion years is inconsequential to someone outside of time. 4 billion years has as little meaning as a millisecond to God. We compare it to a human lifespan and so it seems ridiculously large, but ultimately, from God’s perspective, both measures of time are infinity small.

God is eternal, time has no meaning to Him. Whether we were created in an instant, or over 4, or 10, or 1 million-billion years, it has the same impact on God. None whatsoever.

You are imposing the limitations and concerns of yourself, who is governed by time, on God, who is not. Time has meaning to us because our time, at least our time in this life, is finite. God has no such limitation, and so such concerns are inconsequential to Him.

It’s not just the time, it’s all the environmental changes God had to create to cause all the transitional forms to die out. How many tailor-made environmental changes do you think it took God to make, to cause the die out of all our so-called transitional forms…from bacteria to Man ?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Untold numbers, numbers we simply cannot comprehend.

How does that have any impact on God’s infinite capacity? As with time, God’s capacities are limitless. So whether is was 4, 10, or 1 million-billion tailor made changes, it would have the same impact on God’s capacity. None whatsoever.

Once again, you are imposing limitations which God does not have, and attempting to claim incredulity from the scale of finite human capacity. I understand the tendency to do this, but it is wrong to do so when discussing God.

 

[Techno2000]

Untold numbers, numbers we simply cannot comprehend.

How does that have any impact on God’s infinite capacity? As with time, God’s capacities are limitless. So whether is was 4, 10, or 1 million-billion tailor made changes, it would have the same impact on God’s capacity. None whatsoever.

Once again, you are imposing limitations which God does not have, and attempting to claim incredulity from the scale of finite human capacity. I understand the tendency to do this, but it is wrong to do so when discussing God.

Here’s the rub… According to atheist, you don’t need no God for evolution to work, so you are just standing on the shoulders of atheist.