Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Spirituality

Spirituality

  1. Subscriber Tom Wolsey
    Aficionado of Prawns
    25 Jul '18 02:40
    Can the basic theory of Evolution and the Creation account both be true?

    I guess, in answer to the inevitable "You tell us first what you think," and to remove any suspicion of this being a gotcha question, I'll answer with my opinion: Yes.
  2. Subscriber FMF
    Main Poster
    25 Jul '18 03:05 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
    Can the basic theory of Evolution and the Creation account both be true?
    To me, Christianity - in its scripture - has not offered convincing answers to the questions of how the universe was formed and how humanity came about! To me, at best, it may have offered an allegory.

    So ~ to all those YEC ideologues out there [although, I'm not sure how many there are in this community now that RJHinds and josephw are no longer posting] ~ I say: why not look at "science" in a different way?

    Why not see scientists as God's creatures, exercising their God given talents – even if many of them do not acknowledge they were “given” them – and their God given natural curiosity and determination, to push the knowledge of humanity ~ God's creation ~ to its apparent boundaries and beyond, revelling in the astounding capacity of the God given human spirit, to delve deeper and deeper into the wondrous realities of the earth and the universe ~ God's creation ~ and to truly marvel at what this creation is and how it works?

    Why not just look upon scientists as part of God's creation, then, instrumental in exploring that creation in this way and not get sidetracked by whether or not they just so happen to subscribe to 'answers' that Judaism settled upon and that you subscribe to, or the breakaway religion that Judaism gave rise to?

    Why does it matter to you if scientists are believers or non-believers? Surely you believe it is God’s creation that they are examining? Whether they believe that it is God’s creation that they are examining should hardly matter to you if you are confident in your belief that it is?

    Why is it important to you to reject the endeavours and insights and discoveries of people who are finding out how this universe – designed and deliberately constructed according to your beliefs – actually works, and then marvel at its design and construction, even if they still don’t see it your way?

    Why expect all these brilliant, talented, inquisitive humans to simply settle for explanations that you just so happened to have settled for?
  3. Subscriber Suzianne
    Misfit Queen
    25 Jul '18 05:16
    Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
    Can the basic theory of Evolution and the Creation account both be true?

    I guess, in answer to the inevitable "You tell us first what you think," and to remove any suspicion of this being a gotcha question, I'll answer with my opinion: Yes.
    What about the cosmological theory of the origin of the universe, AKA the 'Big Bang'?

    I notice you left that out. Is there room for it, in your ideology?
  4. 25 Jul '18 05:34
    Originally posted by @suzianne
    What about the cosmological theory of the origin of the universe, AKA the 'Big Bang'?

    I notice you left that out. Is there room for it, in your ideology?
    Lol...

    If God created the Universe would it have been created consistent with the physical laws God put into place?
  5. Standard member Ghost of a Duke
    Zen Master
    25 Jul '18 06:15 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
    Can the basic theory of Evolution and the Creation account both be true?

    I guess, in answer to the inevitable "You tell us first what you think," and to remove any suspicion of this being a gotcha question, I'll answer with my opinion: Yes.
    No.

    Not if the creation account is anchored on two fully formed humans in a garden.


    Edit: Your use of the word 'basic' isn't helpful here as it merely opens the door to a wishy-washy understanding of evolution.
  6. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    25 Jul '18 09:34 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
    No.

    Not if the creation account is anchored on two fully formed humans in a garden.


    Edit: Your use of the word 'basic' isn't helpful here as it merely opens the door to a wishy-washy understanding of evolution.
    Creation and evolution are comparing applies and oranges, for one evolution is a process
    while Creation is a static event, so there could be truth in both since they are both talking
    about two different things, a process and a supernatural event. There is nothing in
    science or the heart of man that actually explains the beginning of all things. The Big
    Bang with out a doubt is just a stepping stone of evolutionary thought applied to the
    universe, not life, that has run out of steps going backward when we think about where
    did it all come, since it starts with everything here.

    With evolution applied to life I it believe can be seen today so its a real thing; however,
    that doesn't mean that what people think about are all possible, that things it is given
    credit for doing actually did occur. I question the common ancestor what would have
    been required due to all of the things required before, during, and afterward once life
    started on a sterile world, that is nothing more than wishful thinking that cannot be
    validated, just believed by those wishing for a way to keep the possibility of God out
    of the picture.
  7. Standard member dj2becker
    rentrer à la maison
    25 Jul '18 14:07
    Originally posted by @suzianne
    What about the cosmological theory of the origin of the universe, AKA the 'Big Bang'?

    I notice you left that out. Is there room for it, in your ideology?
    ‘God spoke and bang, it happened’ could possibly work?
  8. 25 Jul '18 15:41
    Originally posted by @kellyjay
    Creation and evolution are comparing applies and oranges, for one evolution is a process
    while Creation is a static event, so there could be truth in both since they are both talking
    about two different things, a process and a supernatural event. There is nothing in
    science or the heart of man that actually explains the beginning of all things. The Big ...[text shortened]... d, just believed by those wishing for a way to keep the possibility of God out
    of the picture.
    You assume that creation was a static event.

    If so, why the 6 days?
  9. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    25 Jul '18 16:40 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by @whodey
    You assume that creation was a static event.

    If so, why the 6 days?
    It happened and it is done 6 days was the length of time in scripture. Unlike evolution which is an on going process.

    I find this more realistic than the accidental happenstance of getting all the micro and macro laws of the universe setup to form and maintain life over time, and we have not even addressed the grocery store of specific items required to all be in the correct place, at the right times, to be merged in the right order, and qualities, and so on!
  10. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    25 Jul '18 16:52
    Originally posted by @whodey
    You assume that creation was a static event.

    If so, why the 6 days?
    God had His reasons, maybe it was nothing more than a work day pattern for us.
  11. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    25 Jul '18 20:02
    Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
    Can the basic theory of Evolution and the Creation account both be true?

    In the 1950 encyclical Humani generis, Pope Pius XII confirmed that
    there is no intrinsic conflict between Christianity and the theory of evolution ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution

    USA catching up with the rest of the world?
  12. Subscriber Suzianne
    Misfit Queen
    25 Jul '18 20:07
    Originally posted by @kellyjay
    It happened and it is done 6 days was the length of time in scripture. Unlike evolution which is an on going process.

    I find this more realistic than the accidental happenstance of getting all the micro and macro laws of the universe setup to form and maintain life over time, and we have not even addressed the grocery store of specific items required to ...[text shortened]... he correct place, at the right times, to be merged in the right order, and qualities, and so on!
    Are you saying that God would find that too difficult?
  13. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    25 Jul '18 21:58
    Originally posted by @suzianne
    Are you saying that God would find that too difficult?
    No, I think God shared what He did the way He did it. We are the ones finding that to hard
    to believe.
  14. Subscriber Suzianne
    Misfit Queen
    25 Jul '18 22:08
    Originally posted by @kellyjay
    No, I think God shared what He did the way He did it. We are the ones finding that to hard
    to believe.
    But saying "God made" or "He created" doesn't tell us how. Science tells us "how". The purpose of a religious text is to tell us "why". In Genesis, the "why" of creation is always a bigger deal than the "how". We can now see the evidence and put together the "how".
  15. Subscriber Suzianne
    Misfit Queen
    25 Jul '18 22:23
    Originally posted by @kellyjay
    God had His reasons, maybe it was nothing more than a work day pattern for us.
    Exactly. This leads directly to:

    "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates: For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." --Exodus 20:8-11, KJV