Human Intelligence

[Scotishfury09]

I have a question for TE's:

Do you believe that human intelligence is a product of evolution or that it was specifically given to only humans by God? Feel free to elaborate.

I understand there are potential problems with the definition of "intelligence" so let's assume that intelligence is the capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I think human intelligence, if we're talking solely about our mental faculties supported by the biological composition of our brains, is the product of the guided process of theistic evolution- and I emphasize guided, like everything else in our bodies, which was designed specially by God through the process of natural mutations and adaptation to environmental niches.

And I say all this with the caveat as human intelligence is not the Image of God, and believing that the Imago Dei was a special covenant gift by God at some point is the past that transformed biological homo sapiens into humanity.

 

[Mallon]

I believe that human intelligence is both a gift from God and a product of evolution.

Reciprocating question for YECs: Do you believe that rain is a gift from God or a product of random adiabatic forces and the Bergeron Process?

 

[crawfish]

I believe that "intelligence" is a product of evolution. I believe that there is an additional factor, though - call it "self-awareness" - that is the portion of ourselves created in God's image, that portion that yearns for the eternal.

 

[Deamiter]

I believe that human intelligence is both a gift from God and a product of evolution.

Reciprocating question for YECs: Do you believe that rain is a gift from God or a product of random adiabatic forces and the Bergeron Process?

Very good answer (and another good question).

I think everything you mentioned in your OP as 'intelligence' has been demonstrated in great apes so I don't have any particular problem with those things having evolved.

Of course, I do believe that there is a component to us that is unique to humans -- a vague concept of "eternal soul." I don't personally think it was evolved, but then again, there's nothing in the Bible that says God will not (nor even has not) bestowed such a soul on some other creatures. It's clear that we are special and given special loving relationships with God and I don't believe that has evolved. However I don't think the Bible excludes the possibility of other organisms being given a similar relationship.

Anyway, in my mind it's not a hard belief but more of a thought experiment. This is what I think is unique to humans (our soul whatever that is) but while I can justify my ideas, I don't really hold to them all that strongly.

 

[gluadys]

Very good answer (and another good question).

I think everything you mentioned in your OP as 'intelligence' has been demonstrated in great apes so I don't have any particular problem with those things having evolved.

Yes, the capacity of gorillas and apes, not to mention animals less closely related to us, to grasp language, reasoning, etc. has been well established.

Of course, I do believe that there is a component to us that is unique to humans -- a vague concept of "eternal soul." I don't personally think it was evolved, but then again, there's nothing in the Bible that says God will not (nor even has not) bestowed such a soul on some other creatures.

Actually, I find it rather strange that many modern Christians assume that only humans are endowed with soul. Aquinas (following Aristotle) attributes soul to all living things. "Soul" is almost identical to "life". It is what animates a body and makes it alive. ("anima" is Latin for "soul").

But both Aristotle and Aquinas also distinguished different kinds of soul. Plants, it was said, had only vegetative soul--soul that permits life and growth and not much else. The soul of animals includes all the qualities of vegetative soul but also qualities of awareness, curiosity and initiative that do not exist in plants. The human soul is unique in including all that is true of vegetative and animal souls and also those aspects of rational logic, self-awareness, consciousness and moral agency that are unique to humanity.

Of course, these philosophers never speculated on evolutionary relationships between these different sorts of souls. That is an interesting question and I haven't sorted out what to think along those lines.

It's clear that we are special and given special loving relationships with God and I don't believe that has evolved. However I don't think the Bible excludes the possibility of other organisms being given a similar relationship.

I think we too often fall into the error of supposing that God's purpose is to save humanity from sin. Important as that is, scripture suggests it is part of a larger purpose: to save the whole world from the consequences of sin. Given the relationship God established between humanity and the rest of creation, the whole of creation suffers from human sin, and can be saved as humanity is redeemed. So Paul speaks of all creation groaning in anticipation to see the birth of the sons of God. But I do not see us being saved out of the world or apart from the world. God's original purpose in creating will be fulfilled and all the material, vegetative, and animal creation will have its part in the new world right along with us humans.

 

[busterdog]

I believe that human intelligence is both a gift from God and a product of evolution.

Reciprocating question for YECs: Do you believe that rain is a gift from God or a product of random adiabatic forces and the Bergeron Process?

Is this a trick question? Gift of God for course.

 

[Jimlarmore]

I think it's a gift of God and set man apart all of the other biota as the Bible says, "Man has dominion over every creeping thing." Also, I think it's very evident that this elevation of intelligence is not necessary for the survival of the species. Random accidents of mutation and natural selection to produce this?????????????

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[Mallon]

Is this a trick question? Gift of God for course.

No trick question. It's a very honest one, in fact. Most evolution-denyers detest evolution because they feel it replaces God with natural explanations, despite what the Bible says. Well, it also happens that we can explain rain as a culmination of natural processes -- some of which involve chance -- despite the Bible's depiction of rain as a miracle from God. Should we therefore be advocating the teaching of intelligent meteorology in school, too? If not, then I sense a distinct double-standard being promoted by the evolution-denying community.

 

[laptoppop]

No trick question. It's a very honest one, in fact. Most evolution-denyers detest evolution because they feel it replaces God with natural explanations, despite what the Bible says. Well, it also happens that we can explain rain as a culmination of natural processes -- some of which involve chance -- despite the Bible's depiction of rain as a miracle from God. Should we therefore be advocating the teaching of intelligent meteorology in school, too? If not, then I sense a distinct double-standard being promoted by the evolution-denying community.

The difference is that rain is a natural process gift from God in accordance with the Scriptures.

I see evolution as a theory that stands against what is recorded in the Scriptures.

There is no problem with God using natural processes to do what He wants to do. For example, I have no problem if He used an asteroid strike to trigger the global flood. Its just when someone's theory disagrees with Scripture that I have a problem.

I have no problems with plastic, telephones, microchips, etc... developed through understanding how the natural world works.

So there's no double standard -- just a "test all things, hold fast to what is good" standard.

 

[Mallon]

The difference is that rain is a natural process gift from God in accordance with the Scriptures.

I think even that could be debated. When the Bible speaks of rain, it is nearly always in reference to God's divine intervention (Gen 2:5, 7:4; Lev 26:4; Deut 11:14,17, 28:12; 1 Sam 12:17, 18, etc., etc., etc.). I can find no passage suggesting rain is natural. In fact, several passages describe the need for much prayer before God would open the windows of heaven. Does that sound natural??? Surely the Bergeron Process, which states that precipitation is a result of vapour pressure reaching equilibrium in a cloud, is godless and contrary to Scripture!

 

[laptoppop]

I surely hope your tongue is planted firmly in your cheek! Just because Jesus made water into wine, does not mean there can't be a natural process of making wine from grapes.

 

[Mallon]

I surely hope your tongue is planted firmly in your cheek! Just because Jesus made water into wine, does not mean there can't be a natural process of making wine from grapes.

But again, the Bible never speaks of rain as a natural process. It contradicts the very notion and speaks of God hearing prayers and opening sky-windows. Yet you accept that rain is a very natural thing.
Why do you not also accept evolution?

 

[shernren]

To the OP, I believe that a lot has already been said. But I'd just add that to me, intelligence is a biological phenomenon. What spiritual significance does it have? Think about it: Christians believe that the mentally handicapped, the senile, and the illiterate can accept Christianity. What does that tell us about the relevance of intelligence to a person's spiritual relationship with God?

 

[laptoppop]

But again, the Bible never speaks of rain as a natural process. It contradicts the very notion and speaks of God hearing prayers and opening sky-windows. Yet you accept that rain is a very natural thing.
Why do you not also accept evolution?

Post #10 in this thread. Not gonna repeat myself.

 

[Mallon]

Post #10 in this thread. Not gonna repeat myself.

Perhaps you can help me to understand how the natural process of rain is in "accordance with the Scriptures," then.
What makes it any more in accordance with Scipture than, say, the evolutionary creationist who argues that evolution is in accordance with "Let the earth bring forth..."?

 

[laptoppop]

Mallon - please forgive me if I'm misjudging you on this -- but if I thought you were really asking, I'd answer. As it is, it feels like you just want to argue a bit.

IMHO, evolution is contrary to the scriptures and a 6-day creation. Its likely He used a combination of supernatural and natural processes during those 6 days.

Also IMHO, the Lord makes it rain on the just and the unjust alike -- most of the time He uses natural processes, sometimes He intervenes. This is consistent with how I see rain portrayed in the Scriptures. Blueletterbible.org lists 87 verses with the word rain as a quick first pass. Scanning those verses, there's natural processes and supernatural ones. God works both ways.

 

[shernren]

Let's get back to the OP.