Evolution vs. Creationism

[PoetOfDreams]

I can't say I understand your argument at all. Could you perhaps explain more clearly?

I am trying to form what I am trying to say. I think I have to try again.

Ok, we can't exactly pinpoint what MAKES good or evil. It just exist ever since the time of humanity. So, when people decides not to help out the starving population, they have decided that because it is their choice. It doesn't MAKE them a evil person, just the act itself is evil. It can be applied to God as well.

Ok.....I don't make good points. I don't know how exactly.....maybe you should disregard my post Duty.

 

[gloomy-optimist]

Good and evil are more or less human constructs. We originally assigned things to be good or evil depending on whether or not they are socially beneficial or harmful, and as society became more complex so did our definitions and assignments of good and evil.
I think what would apply to God would be less "good" or "evil" and more "beneficial" or "unbeneficial" to him.

 

[Duty]

I am trying to form what I am trying to say. I think I have to try again.

Ok, we can't exactly pinpoint what MAKES good or evil. It just exist ever since the time of humanity. So, when people decides not to help out the starving population, they have decided that because it is their choice. It doesn't MAKE them a evil person, just the act itself is evil. It can be applied to God as well.

Ok.....I don't make good points. I don't know how exactly.....maybe you should disregard my post Duty.

You poor thing. ::

I think you're trying to say that God isn't a narcissistic or sadistic entity, just that he has acted with poor judgment in how he created the world?

And I will highly agree that there is a difference between having a virtue, such as courage (being a courageous person) vs an action that is courageous. Just because one has performed a cowardly act doesn't mean they possess the virtue of cowardice.

 

[PoetOfDreams]

You poor thing. ::

I think you're trying to say that God isn't a narcissistic or sadistic entity, just that he has acted with poor judgment in how he created the world?

And I will highly agree that there is a difference between having a virtue, such as courage (being a courageous person) vs an action that is courageous. Just because one has performed a cowardly act doesn't mean they possess the virtue of cowardice.

I think that is what i am trying to get at. Thanks Duty.

 

[Duty]

I think that is what i am trying to get at. Thanks Duty.

See, my question, then, would be if God is truly omniscient and omnipotent. How can an entity that is both of these make poor decisions?

 

[PoetOfDreams]

See, my question, then, would be if God is truly omniscient and omnipotent. How can an entity that is both of these make poor decisions?

Maybe I am not a true believer in the Christian God, but He seems a bit off. Sure, he created us and the whole world. But, he can't be absolutely perfect. (being truly omniscient and omnipotent) If so, then this world will be in total utopia. Obviously, it is not. Then He isn't suppose to be granted the title "God" you might think. True. Let's just substitute God with lets say "Higher Being" or whatever. Then this higher being is not made out to be glorious like all those Christians say. So this "higher being" can make flaws in its judgments..... but he have gone a far way. Creating this planet and everyone who inhabits it is an example.

There's my effort to debate. It is a poor job, I know.

 

[EloquentBohemian]

Good and evil are more or less human constructs. We originally assigned things to be good or evil depending on whether or not they are socially beneficial or harmful, and as society became more complex so did our definitions and assignments of good and evil.
I think what would apply to God would be less "good" or "evil" and more "beneficial" or "unbeneficial" to him.

I would agree, and add that good/evil are relative to the individual or group assigning the qualifications defining good/evil.
What is good for one society/civilization may not be good for the individual.
What is good for one society/civilization may not be good for another society/civilization.

As a general example - slavery was good for various European societies/civilizations and America, yet evil/bad for African societies/civilizations.

Another general example would be that homosexuality is termed evil for many Christian social groups, yet can be termed good for many secular social groups.

 

[Duty]

Maybe I am not a true believer in the Christian God, but He seems a bit off. Sure, he created us and the whole world. But, he can't be absolutely perfect. (being truly omniscient and omnipotent) If so, then this world will be in total utopia. Obviously, it is not. Then He isn't suppose to be granted the title "God" you might think. True. Let's just substitute God with lets say "Higher Being" or whatever. Then this higher being is not made out to be glorious like all those Christians say. So this "higher being" can make flaws in its judgments..... but he have gone a far way. Creating this planet and everyone who inhabits it is an example.

There's my effort to debate. It is a poor job, I know.

No, you're doing fine. You're basically saying the same exact same I was a couple pages ago...that God can't be omnipotent, omniscient, and yet benevolent too...it doesn't make sense.

 

[PoetOfDreams]

No, you're doing fine. You're basically saying the same exact same I was a couple pages ago...that God can't be omnipotent, omniscient, and yet benevolent too...it doesn't make sense.

Ok.

I just think there is a "higher" being. Maybe looking over us, but have some limitations. That is why there are all sorts of loop holes. He is just trying the best he can.

 

[arbygil]

No, you're doing fine. You're basically saying the same exact same I was a couple pages ago...that God can't be omnipotent, omniscient, and yet benevolent too...it doesn't make sense.

Well...I would say that our limited minds have a tough time comprehending infinity too, but that's another idea. I would ask this: Why can't it make sense? I won't begrudge your beliefs, Duty - that's not fair of me. But a lot of things don't make sense to me unless I take my time to be open to them. Like many times when I hear some of your intense arguments they don't make sense to me because I'm approaching it from an INFJ angle. But if I begin to learn what you're trying to teach me, then things will start to make some sense. I might not agree with everything, but at least I'll understand that it's not a personal attack - or was never meant to be a personal attack.

Sometimes it's all just one big misunderstanding.

 

[Duty]

Well...I would say that our limited minds have a tough time comprehending infinity too, but that's another idea. I would ask this: Why can't it make sense?

Well, from what has always been my traditional filter of looking at the world, it just is illogical. If God created the world, and had all 3 of these powers, the world would be perfect, both God and humans would be fulfilled with what they required out of the world, and if God found worship of him so important, then he would make it obvious that he exists (and would be perfectly capable of it).

 

[arbygil]

Well, from what has always been my traditional filter of looking at the world, it just is illogical. If God created the world, and had all 3 of these powers, the world would be perfect, both God and humans would be fulfilled with what they required out of the world, and if God found worship of him so important, then he would make it obvious that he exists (and would be perfectly capable of it).

*Nod* I can see that as a personal belief - I think it makes sense from your point of view as well. Me, I tilt that just a little bit. In my belief, I think we did have perfection, once, but mankind wasn't ready for it. So why didn't God create us perfect so we could enjoy paradise? Well...my answer would be this: I can't know perfection unless I have something imperfect to compare it to. And if I'm not ready to enjoy it, why have it?

In my opinion, I don't think God needs us. If you're omnipotent, perfect, and fulfilled in yourself you don't need anything else. So maybe the question becomes why create anything at all? Why create creatures with rational thought with the ability to reject you and reject each other? Why set yourself up for that heartbreak?

That, to me, is the real question.

But humans are attracted and drawn to the mysteries of the universe and they're drawn to understanding what created what - and why. And how.

Logically, Duty, you're right: It's difficult - perhaps impossible - to measure concepts beyond the five senses. But there are too many things that can't be quantifiable, can't be measured with human insight - there are things we can't understand right away because we just don't have all the knowledge yet. I'm not saying we won't have it, but...yeah. Sometimes bad things happen and we don't know why. Sometimes supposed holy men do really horrible, rotten things in the name of their gods. Sometimes followers of holy doctrines say and do horrible, rotten things. There just aren't good enough answers for those things.

But now I'm rambling - I'm being extremely INFJ and it's probably starting to irritate you. I'll say this: Keep questioning. Keep asking. Eventually the answers will make sense.

 

[anahata]

No, you're doing fine. You're basically saying the same exact same I was a couple pages ago...that God can't be omnipotent, omniscient, and yet benevolent too...it doesn't make sense.

Could with parallel universes, forgetfullness and evolution. Evolution requires the destruction of what has been before for the transformation process which can be interpretted as suffering.

 

[Azure_Knight]

If you follow a Christian line of argument, the world is not a perfect utopia because we are given free will by God. The argument goes that God wanted to create a universe that was filled with all sorts of creation including humans as a "final" creation. We were given free will so that we might accept and love God of our own free will; the current thinking goes that God wanted something that could be able to reason and that would be able to accept God and love Him. However, we were also free to completely reject God as well.

A lot of religion hinges on faith: belief in something that can't necessarily be proven or have concrete evidence that can be tested.

Science and religion can exist independent of each other, and don't necessarily conflict.

 

[PsilocinProject]

No, you're doing fine. You're basically saying the same exact same I was a couple pages ago...that God can't be omnipotent, omniscient, and yet benevolent too...it doesn't make sense.

God can be all of those things.

Human choices are the flaw in the system; otherwise everything would flourish and all would be, essentially, perfection. Nature balances itself out. Human beings don't.

Christianity teaches self-control, not the control of other human beings. I've realized now that God lies within nature. God is the rhythm of physical existence. It all follows a great pattern, that is perfect. Nature has a way of balancing itself out. If human beings learn self-control, via the individual, they can master science, mind and body without issue. There will be nothing hindering the progress.

However human beings haven't mastered the self nor the body. Technology and living today is only complicating that mastery. Spirituality and technology can integrate wonderfully- We're just not yet prepared. We're progressing too fast. Either we'll end up killing ourselves or some external cause will wipe the slate clean.

There are correlations between God and nature. It is my personal belief that God is nature.

Argue it. I need to be challenged on these ideas.
Edit: I also need to mention that I am not Christian. Christianity has been twisted and tainted by, what else, human beings to fit the needs of the time. There is still truth in the bible but no Christian today is a true Christian.

 

[Azure_Knight]

What is a true Christian then? Can there not be faith without human flaws?

 

[PsilocinProject]

What is a true Christian then? Can there not be faith without human flaws?

There can be faith without human flaws but they're leaving out the "Free choice" thing. They're putting too much faith that "The Almighty" will guide them in the right direction, when it comes down to their personal choice. What they fail to see is that Christianity isn't about the control of others- It's about the control of self.

The words have been twisted to help agendas of avarice, hate, disillusion, etc. A true Christian is one that applies Jesus' words but also pays attention to other beliefs that may actually strengthen their faith and willpower in Christianity.

It isn't my personal belief that Christ was the messiah but I have no issue with someone believing so. Now, let me make this known: I have no problems with Christians. I think they've just been misguided by misinterpretations for about a thousand years. They mean well and I know they do but they're failing to see the forest through the trees.

There is a bigger picture here. Everything ties in way too well. I'm seeing way too many correlations in religious beliefs and practices in cultures around the world that it seems too convincing.

Either way, a path of self-control, even though you may not believe in "God" as Christianity believes, will lead to a life of less strife and more understanding and love. The point of all of this is, indeed, love. But love doesn't mean indulgence. Love means that you make good enough decisions to stick around longer to give and spread more love.

You feelin' me?

 

[Azure_Knight]

I see your point. I have also known Christians that have practiced Buddhism to perfect their self as it were.

I also agree that people can be guided by misinterpretation. However, that seems to be the nature of religion in general: how can you be 100% sure without examining the source itself? You either accept presented beliefs, reject them, come up with something else, or follow a middle path. The world may never have absolute undeniable historical evidence and hard fact to back up all of the claims that have been made both in the bible and by the Christian community itself. Again, that seems to play into the realm of the faith argument more than anything else.

As far as correlations between religious beliefs and practices, most major religions that I know of have been borrowing from each other for centuries. Christianity itself split off into different directions during the reformation and continues to do so today. With the advent of the internet and better technology, diffusion of ideas can happen much more quickly. Ergo, you have faster 'evolution' of religion so to speak.

But what of love? What is it's purpose?

 

[PsilocinProject]

I see your point. I have also known Christians that have practiced Buddhism to perfect their self as it were.

I also agree that people can be guided by misinterpretation. However, that seems to be the nature of religion in general: how can you be 100% sure without examining the source itself? You either accept presented beliefs, reject them, come up with something else, or follow a middle path. The world may never have absolute undeniable historical evidence and hard fact to back up all of the claims that have been made both in the bible and by the Christian community itself. Again, that seems to play into the realm of the faith argument more than anything else.

Christianity, Judaism and Islam all have the same roots: Yahweh.
There are certain correlations between that of God and that of the natural.
Whether you're atheist, Buddhist, Christian or what have you, we all agree that we all came from the same place. That is the fact of the matter. I mentioned this earlier in the thread. Nature is the all-providing, all-guiding force. We all, no matter what, bow down to the natural. It feeds you, clothes you and shelters you. It gives you everything you have.
You needn't worship it but you must give at least some kind of thanks and respect for the natural order of things.

As far as correlations between religious beliefs and practices, most major religions that I know of have been borrowing from each other for centuries. Christianity itself split off into different directions during the reformation and continues to do so today. With the advent of the internet and better technology, diffusion of ideas can happen much more quickly. Ergo, you have faster 'evolution' of religion so to speak.

I'm aware of this. I've studied the schism of the Catholic church and branches/sects of different beliefs as well.

They've all led me back to the same point: Religious practices of tribal societies. There are very few left; however I think they've got it right. These are the noble people that live intertwined with nature. They try to not control the natural way of things- Simply themselves. In reality, all these ideas: Control, money, capitalism, dogma, etc are all human-created ideals. They're, essentially, lies. There is such a thing as purity.

But what of love? What is it's purpose?

Give me an argument against love, then we'll talk.

 

[Milon]

In reality, all these ideas: Control, money, capitalism, dogma, etc are all human-created ideals. They're, essentially, lies.

I've often found it strange that we're having trouble enjoying our lives because we don't have enough pieces of paper or metal (or plastic!) to trade for stuff. Honestly, there isn't a shortage of food or water or work to be done. Why don't we just forget about pushing around the paper and metal, and give food where it's needed, and help where we can? Not realistic, I know. Oops - sorry for the derail!