Evolution

[BobRyan]

I don't believe in Intelligent Design.

I believe in creationism.

Intelligent Design is a cheap attempt to shoehorn creationism into the science arena, where it doesn't belong.

does the Creator's work show "Intelligence" in the design of it. Or a lack thereof in your view?

 

[LoAmmi]

Arguing that because we haven't done something so far means that we can't do it or that it didn't occur in nature is shortsighted to an extreme I can't fathom.

 

[BobRyan]

I think it would be interesting to ask religious people how they could NOT believe in intelligent design. Maybe a deist has some excuse, but what sort of lazy, good-for-nothing God would not take an interest and become involved in abiogenesis and evolution? Why worship such a feckless being?

Interesting question.

When Michael Angelo completed a painting does it show "a total lack of intelligence" or a "brilliant mind"?

Those who believe in some sort of God - have a hard time taking up the position that what He does - shows no intelligence.

Romans 1 comes to mind.

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

Paul argues that even non-Bible cultures are "without excuse"
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse

 

[BobRyan]

Arguing that because we haven't done something so far means that we can't do it or that it didn't occur in nature is shortsighted to an extreme I can't fathom.

That is the "distinctive" for those who believe in God - there is always a "difference" between what infinite God can do and what finite man can do -- by definition.

 

[LoAmmi]

That is the "distinctive" for those who believe in God - there is always a "difference" between what infinite God can do and what finite man can do -- by definition.

I'm not a fan of the G-d of the gaps idea. If we create a cell, does your worldview fall apart? It shouldn't. But it seems like it could.

If the gaps get smaller, the idea of G-d gets smaller too when you subscribe to it.

 

[AV1611VET]

does the Creator's work show "Intelligence" in the design of it. Or a lack thereof in your view?

It shows intelligence.

But then, I'm not an expert on intelligence.

And while I believe the universe was intelligently designed, I do not accept Intelligent Design.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Do you believe life exist else where?

*shrugs* Possibly, if the conditions are right. The chance of encountering sapient life that just happens to exist at exactly this point in history within "shouting distance" of ourselves is astronomically small, however.

Do you believe that this process is continuing today on this planet?

What process, exactly?
Evolution is happening right as we speak, all around us. Natural selection is always at work.

Can man in our limited knowledge produce a living cell?

Given the vast timespans it took for life to appear, it shouldn't come as much of a surprise that we haven't been able to fully replicate the process in a mere 50+ years. Remember, DNA was only discovered a couple of decades ago.
With all of that said, we HAVE been able to create wholly artificial viruses at this point, which is a HUGE step forward, given the time frames we are talking about here.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Well AV, I have never been able to figure out whether you are an immensely dedicated jokester just pulling our legs, or whether you are the real deal. Whatever the case may be, I'm glad to hear that even you acknowledge that Biblical myth isn't science, and should not pretend to be so.
"Intelligent Design" is religion pretending to be a natural science, and harms more than just its own credibility in the process.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well AV, I have never been able to figure out whether you are an immensely dedicated jokester just pulling our legs, or whether you are the real deal.

There's a fine line between the two, is there not?

I can assure you I'm the real McCoy.

Whatever the case may be, I'm glad to hear that even you acknowledge that Biblical myth isn't science, and should not pretend to be so.

Perhaps you misunderstood what I said.

I said I don't believe in Intelligent Design.

I believe in creationism.

"Intelligent Design" is religion pretending to be a natural science, and harms more than just its own credibility in the process.

Either that, or it's a cheap attempt to get creationism into the scientific arena, where it doesn't belong.

 

[Supreme]

I believe in evolution, because it is infinitely convincing, and a beautiful but harsh model explaining the diversity of life.

 

[AV1611VET]

I believe in evolution, because it is infinitely convincing, and a beautiful but harsh model explaining the diversity of life.

"Beautiful and convincing" -- reminds me of Genesis 3.

 

[cloudyday2]

I believe in evolution, because it is infinitely convincing, and a beautiful but harsh model explaining the diversity of life.

So God said "Let there be whatever ... Anything is fine ... I'm not picky ... Use your own judgment."

This is the same God that dictated Leviticus?

 

[LoAmmi]

So God said "Let there be whatever ... Anything is fine ... I'm not picky ... Use your own judgment."

This is the same God that dictated Leviticus?

Leviticus is part of a legal code with expectations and penalties for failing to follow the legal code. Genesis is not. They have two different purposes and Genesis doesn't even try to address the "how", which science does.

 

[cloudyday2]

Leviticus is part of a legal code with expectations and penalties for failing to follow the legal code. Genesis is not. They have two different purposes and Genesis doesn't even try to address the "how", which science does.

I don't see how that matters. According to abiogenesis and evolution, God didn't care about the creation of DNA or what species might evolve on Earth. Maybe Earth would be occupied by intelligent slime molds instead of humans.

But this God cared about whether people eat pork or not?

 

[LoAmmi]

I don't see how that matters. According to abiogenesis and evolution, God didn't care about the creation of DNA or what species might evolve on Earth. Maybe Earth would be occupied by intelligent slime molds instead of humans.

Well, it's quite possible to believe that He had a hand in the direction evolution took. We believe He is in control of everything.

But this God cared about whether people eat pork or not?

About whether Jews did it or not. The Torah (Leviticus included) is not binding upon Gentiles at all.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, it's quite possible to believe that He had a hand in the direction evolution took.

Were the angels created via evolution, or sans evolution?

 

[LoAmmi]

Were the angels created via evolution, or sans evolution?

Some Jewish traditions hold that angels are created at the time they are used and then no longer exist. How spirits are created, however, has nothing to do with the processes that brought matter into existence or how life came to be.

 

[AV1611VET]

Some Jewish traditions hold that angels are created at the time they are used and then no longer exist. How spirits are created, however, has nothing to do with the processes that brought matter into existence or how life came to be.

I disagree.

The angels were created ex nihilo.

Later, matter was created ex nihilo.

And over a period of six days, the level of matter/energy in existence went from zero to its current amount.

And in that six-day period, God created life on the earth ex materia.

Abiogenesis is a joke.

 

[LoAmmi]

I disagree.

You're free to believe whatever you'd like.

 

[BabylonWeary]

You're free to believe whatever you'd like.

So you say, but, as long as the evolutionary biologists insist they're somehow the official representatives of the original primordial ooze and therefore everyone in the world is obliged to conform to their beliefs or else be ostracized in some way or another, you'll see this debate will never end.