Evolution conflict and division

o_mlly · Saturday at 12:31 PM

The Barbarian said:
You do realize that the passage you quote, is used by Christians to support God's continuing role in evolution (indeed in all of nature), do you not? It's pretty much the point of theistic evolution.

Theistic Evolution: a Contemporary Aristotelian-Thomistic Perspective Cambridge University Press: 19 October 2023
Chapter five asks a question about the hypothetical reaction of Aquinas to evolutionary biology, revealing the complexity of the debate on whether there is a “space” for evolution in his theology, as well as the openness for reinterpretation and further development of his ideas in reference to the contemporary metaphysical analyses of speciation. It ends with an original constructive proposal of the contemporary Thomistic account of theistic evolution.

You wrote: "Perhaps Summa Theologica [sic] St. Thomas Aquinas) would help you in that search. It could clear up a lot of questions for you."

But it appears that your passion for the false ideas of theistic evolution have impeded your reading skills:

"But such a thing cannot be, because the secondary instrumental cause does not participate the action of the superior cause ...".

And, "no" my citation is not used by Christians to support macro-evolution -- just the opposite.

You may try again to refute Aquinas on the errors of theistic evolution but not by using the primary source, i.e, the Summa.

The Barbarian · Saturday at 1:13 PM

o_mlly said:
But it appears that your passion for the false ideas of theistic evolution have impeded your reading skills:
"But such a thing cannot be, because the secondary instrumental cause does not participate the action of the superior cause ...".

You've confused theism with deism. Deism would be an issue with that, but not theistic evolution.

o_mlly said:
And, "no" my citation is not used by Christians to support macro-evolution -- just the opposite.

Your denial is simply refuted by the facts. Read the book and learn how Thomism is consistent with evolution. You may try again to refute St. Tom, but it's a futile effort. Better theologians than you and I disagree with you.

You might also want to read Communion and Stewardship; Human Persons Created in the Image of God by the International Theological Commission:

Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God

And maybe read a little more of Aquinas; you seem to have missed a great deal.

The Barbarian · Saturday at 1:21 PM

Speaking as a Catholic, I'm no fan of Freemasons, but it seems excessively paranoid to put them down as worshipers of Lucifer.

SpiritMorpher said:
It is not paranoid. I've been involved in Catholic Church and involved in Freemasonry. They're both societies ran by Satan.

"Those darn papist masonic satanists!"

SpiritMorpher said:
Apes, monkeys, and animals are not the same as humans.

We are animals. Mammals, primates, hominoids, apes. We are a genetic ingroup with chimpanzees and bonobos, with other apes the outgroup.

SpiritMorpher said:
Genesis clearly shows a difference in humans and other creatures.

Yes, God gives us a living soul directly. It's spiritual, not physical. You're looking in the wrong place.

SpiritMorpher said:
Speaking of revising God's Word, that is what the Catholic Church has been doing since they began. They have attempted to change the laws of God, and the Protestant Church followed. What I can see from your post is that you do not follow God's Word, rather believe in the lies taught to you by the system and ruling religious societies.

Not paranoid... no sirreee. "Those darn papist masonic satanic Protestants!"

The Barbarian · Saturday at 1:37 PM

SpiritMorpher said:
Read the Bible. Have you even read Genesis?

Did you not notice I've been citing Genesis? C'mon.

SpiritMorpher said:
How Humans were created last.

We are a very recent species. Never thought about it, but that fits Genesis,too.

SpiritMorpher said:
You are out to attack.

I'm just pointing out facts. And yeah, having some fun with your hostility to freemasons, Catholics, Protestants, etc.

SpiritMorpher said:
You're a psychic vampire feeding off of the energy of others.

I'm a fine, clean-cut barbarian. And I'm not a believer in psychics, seances, and such. Sorry.

SpiritMorpher said:
It's best to not even interact with you at this point

I realize that it's not gone very well for you, but you probably learned some things in the process.

SpiritMorpher said:
you obviously are a follower of Satan out to attack God's Word. It is very evident.

Poe alert...?

FaithT · Saturday at 1:42 PM

SpiritMorpher said:
It is not paranoid. I've been involved in Catholic Church and involved in Freemasonry. They're both societies ran by Satan. We're not apes. All one needs to do is read Genesis. Apes, monkeys, and animals are not the same as humans. Science has lied to us. Genesis clearly shows a difference in humans and other creatures. You cannot have two masters, for you will hate one and love the other! Speaking of revising God's Word, that is what the Catholic Church has been doing since they began. They have attempted to change the laws of God, and the Protestant Church followed. What I can see from your post is that you do not follow God's Word, rather believe in the lies taught to you by the system and ruling religious societies.

WHAT????

FaithT · Saturday at 1:44 PM

SpiritMorpher said:
Read the Bible. Have you even read Genesis? How Humans were created last. You are out to attack. You're a psychic vampire feeding off of the energy of others. It's best to not even interact with you at this point because you obviously are a follower of Satan out to attack God's Word. It is very evident.

You have GOT to be kidding.

The Barbarian · Saturday at 1:54 PM

FaithT said:
You have GOT to be kidding.

Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture which says that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, any parodic or sarcastic expression of extreme views can be mistaken by some readers for a sincere expression of those views.

Mercy Shown · Saturday at 2:35 PM

The Barbarian said:
He created the world to produce us. Doesn't matter if it was by necessity or contingency.

Since natural selection is not guided by a conscious force or goal; it's a mindless, mechanistic process where environmental pressures non-randomly favor individuals with advantageous traits, leading to adaptation over time, but without inherent direction or purpose. While genetic mutations are random, the selection of those mutations that improve survival and reproduction in a specific environment is a non-random filtering process that drives evolution. Then, by definition God cannot be involved or else it is not natural selection.

The Barbarian said:
If you think so, you still don't get God as Creator.

God could have made the world otherwise. He chose not to. He killed animals to make clothing for Adam and Eve. He instructed men to sacrifice animals to please Him. If you want to label this as evil, then your beef is not with evolutionary theory.

God immediately gives each of us a living soul. It's not physical. We have become like Him in soul and spirit.

It's done by Him directly to each of us. I believe it happens at conception. But it's clear that it isn't a biological event.

Yes. I don't know when the first two humans got living souls. If they happened to be H. erectus, would that offend you? We see that Neanderthals took care of people who obviously could not have survived on their own, so it was a very long time ago.

Ok, you are an honest man. Thank-you for clarifying your positions. They are a mix of faith and science. For me, I am either an atheist who adheres to evolution or a creationist who takes the bible fairly literally but I never could be a theistic evolutionist. Having said that I agree with Paul when he said, "let each man be convinced in his own mind." I have found your posts to be engaging and interesting, so I thank you for your time.

Mercy Shown · Saturday at 2:43 PM

Akita Suggagaki said:
“Truths about what?”

Truths about the human struggle to make sense of our existence with aspiration and hope.

Are you an atheist? If, so your list does seem compelling with your final question a real stumper.

If you are a literalist I suppose you can try to blame it all onEve and Adam. I did not read all 24 pages so maybe you made your beliefs clear.

And all the things you mentioned are not only confined to eons in the past. To this day human sponsored suffering, in fact all suffering, raises the theodicy question.

In Asian religion they have Karma working its way out. Buddhists just live with the reality. Christians have God incarnate who willingly enters into all with love and acceptance. Jews are a mystery to me. They still have faith after the Holocaust.

For many if us suffering is the supreme challenge to our faith.

I agree with your post, but the question was about suffering and death as a means of creating mankind rather than a perfect creation from the hands of a loving creator devolving because of sin. Atheists have no such concerns because everything came from meaninglessness and will return to it in time.

Akita Suggagaki · Saturday at 3:16 PM

Mercy Shown said:
I agree with your post, but the question was about suffering and death as a means of creating mankind rather than a perfect creation from the hands of a loving creator devolving because of sin. Atheists have no such concerns because everything came from meaninglessness and will return to it in time.

Yes, meaninglessness to meaninglessness.

Sin has certainly contributed to our suffering. But we are creatures made from dust. We are still grappling with our primitive instincts.

Akita Suggagaki · Saturday at 3:28 PM

The Barbarian said:
I'm a fine, clean-cut barbarian

AI knows all about you.
“The word "barbarian" comes from the ancient Greek bárbaros, an onomatopoeic term meaning "babbler" or "stammerer," describing the "bar bar bar" sound of foreign, unintelligible languages to Greek ears. Initially used for any non-Greek speaker (Egyptians, Persians, Romans), the Romans later applied it to tribes outside their culture, shifting its meaning from merely foreign to uncivilized or savage, a connotation it carries today.

Cool!

The Barbarian · Saturday at 3:49 PM

Mercy Shown said:
Since natural selection is not guided by a conscious force or goal; it's a mindless, mechanistic process where environmental pressures non-randomly favor individuals with advantageous traits, leading to adaptation over time, but without inherent direction or purpose.

You're still resisting the fact that God can use contingency to effect His will.

Mercy Shown said:
While genetic mutations are random, the selection of those mutations that improve survival and reproduction in a specific environment is a non-random filtering process that drives evolution. Then, by definition God cannot be involved or else it is not natural selection.

For a Christian, God is completely involved with every bit of creation. The laws that drive natural selection exist only as long as He wills them to.

Mercy Shown said:
Thank-you for clarifying your positions. They are a mix of faith and science.

Faith is for God. Science is for the physical universe. Which is why Newton and Darwin asserted a Creator, but did not insert Him into their theories.

Mercy Shown said:
For me, I am either an atheist who adheres to evolution or a creationist who takes the bible fairly literally but I never could be a theistic evolutionist.

Since the vast majority of the world's Christians belong to denominations that say evolution is consistent with the Bible, yours is a minority viewpoint. It certainly isn't an issue that determines your salvation, of course.

The Barbarian · Saturday at 3:53 PM

Mercy Shown said:
rather than a perfect creation from the hands of a loving creator devolving because of sin.

It hardly needs to be pointed out that a loving Creator would not subject innocent animals to suffering and death, because a man and a woman disobeyed Him.

The Barbarian · Saturday at 3:57 PM

Akita Suggagaki said:
the Romans later applied it to tribes outside their culture, shifting its meaning from merely foreign to uncivilized or savage, a connotation it carries today.

It might be noted that barbarian cultures tended to be polite cultures. Being rude in an Anglo-Saxon community was a risky business.

Luke81718 · Saturday at 3:57 PM

TGGIL said:
Evolution conflict and division.
Post by TGGIL

The Great Divide: Evolution vs. Creation
Let’s imagine the world split evenly in two. Half of humanity believes that the universe, Earth, the sun, and all life evolved naturally—through processes like the Big Bang and biological evolution. This group sees no need for a supreme, omnipresent creator. The other half believes in a spiritual, all-knowing God who created everything: space, time, matter, and life itself. These two worldviews stand in stark contrast, each with passionate followers and deep convictions.
The Question to Evolutionists
In a global debate arena, we pose a question to the evolution-believing half: Why would evolutionists ever invent the concept of God? If early humans evolved to reason and reflect, what sparked the idea of a supreme being—an invisible, omnipresent spirit called God? Was it fear, wonder, politics, or something else entirely?
⚔️ A Political Split in the Evolution Camp
Could the idea of God have emerged from a political or philosophical divide among early evolutionists themselves? Imagine two thinkers—brothers, perhaps—who shared a belief in evolution but disagreed on how society should be governed. Over time, their disagreements grew. Each brother attracted followers. Tensions escalated. Neither was evil, but both were convinced they were right.
The Birth of a New Belief
To end the conflict and create a clear separation, one brother conceived a radical idea: invent a spiritual creator. This wasn’t a scientific theory—it was a symbolic revolution. By introducing God, he rejected the shared evolutionary narrative and forged a new path. His followers embraced this divine origin story, not as fiction, but as truth. Books were written. Rituals formed. A new worldview took root.
The Power of Belief
This wasn’t just a clever tactic—it was transformative. The belief in God offered comfort, purpose, and unity. It created a distinct identity, separate from the scientific narrative. Over generations, this belief became deeply embedded in culture, law, and morality. Half the population now sees God not as an invention, but as the ultimate reality.
Who Created Whom?
So we return to the central question: Did evolution create God, or did God create evolution? Was the divine a product of human imagination, born from conflict and division? Or is God the eternal source of all things, including the very minds that question Him?

John Owen tackles these issues in his book Biblical Theology. A must read for any discerning believer.

Of course, we who are His chosen people know full well that God the Father and His Son the Lord Jesus Christ, are supranaturally before all things. And yet, there are many who name the name of Christ who have embraced the idea of purely natural causes for the world we see around us. In their reckoning, as long as God is the first cause, whatever process He may have used to bring about all matter and all life, are acceptable to them.

Luke81718 · Saturday at 4:04 PM

Luke81718 said:
John Owen tackles these issues in his book Biblical Theology. A must read for any discerning believer.

Of course, we who are His chosen people know full well that God the Father and His Son the Lord Jesus Christ, are supranaturally before all things. And yet, there are many who name the name of Christ who have embraced the idea of purely natural causes for the world we see around us. In their reckoning, as long as God is the first cause, whatever process He may have used to bring about all matter and all life, are acceptable to them.

Moderator.
Please delete this comment, it was a double post. I see that the site is still having some issues. I disabled my ad blocker, which helped a bit. Any further suggestions to make things run more smoothly would be appreciated.
Thanks

The Barbarian · Saturday at 4:14 PM

Luke81718 said:
Of course, we who are His chosen people know full well that God the Father and His Son the Lord Jesus Christ, are supranaturally before all things. And yet, there are many who name the name of Christ who have embraced the idea of purely natural causes for the world we see around us. In their reckoning, as long as God is the first cause, whatever process He may have used to bring about all matter and all life, are acceptable to them.

If we remember that a sparrow does not fall without God's notice, theistic evolution is a consistent understanding about His creation. Deistic evolution is not theistic evolution.

Luke81718 · Saturday at 4:30 PM

The Barbarian said:
If we remember that a sparrow does not fall without God's notice, theistic evolution is a consistent understanding about His creation. Deistic evolution is not theistic evolution.

It would be perhaps, were it supported by the facts. Many brave evolutionary biologists have come to this conclusion, secular and religious alike. Their thoughts and conclusions are well publicized. I could provide links to their findings were you interested. Though I suspect you have already fully decided the matter for yourself.

I see no difference between theistic or deistic evolution, but as I am of the Creationist persuasion, it matters not to me one way or the other.

The Barbarian · Saturday at 5:14 PM

If we remember that a sparrow does not fall without God's notice, theistic evolution is a consistent understanding about His creation. Deistic evolution is not theistic evolution.

Luke81718 said:
It would be perhaps, were it supported by the facts.

Jesus said it. I believe it.

Luke81718 said:
Many brave evolutionary biologists have come to this conclusion, secular and religious alike.

If they confuse theism and deism, "brave" isn't their problem.

Luke81718 said:
Their thoughts and conclusions are well publicized. I could provide links to their findings were you interested.

Might be useful for you to present them here for discussion. What do you have?

Luke81718 said:
I see no difference between theistic or deistic evolution

If so, we've located the problem. Would you like me to explain the difference?

The Barbarian · Saturday at 5:19 PM

Luke81718 said:
And yet, there are many who name the name of Christ who have embraced the idea of purely natural causes for the world we see around us.

God does most things in this world by natural processes. And BTW, He made it so that it told us about Him.

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.

Nature is His creation. Don't underestimate it.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Evolution conflict and division

“Behold, I make all things new.”

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Crabby Old White Guy

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Active Member

Active Member

Crabby Old White Guy

Active Member

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Similar threads